Megabase-ing yes or no

[Mysterious box]

Just now, grm9 said:

that's why i said that it was a comparison between that and old bosses, with both being mostly puzzles 

I not really sure old bosses can really be called puzzles could you give a example though?

[grm9]

1 minute ago, Mysterious box said:

I not really sure old bosses can really be called puzzles could you give a example though?

probably not the right word but the point is that both don't require doing much hard stuff in most cases and have multiple solutions depending on your situation, with almost the only difference being that one requires interacting with it only during the fight and the other during an entire season and that might be a good thing in case of bosses because even managing temperature is obnoxious at times 

[Mysterious box]

Just now, grm9 said:

probably not the right word but the point is that both don't require doing much hard stuff in most cases and have multiple solutions depending on your situation, with almost the only difference being that one requires interacting with it only during the fight and the other during an entire season and that might be a good thing in case of bosses because even managing temperature is obnoxious at times 

I think it mostly comes down to preference really which is fine.

[Yuuko]

3 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

Disagree losing a base is often very demoralizing and I don't think that's a oh well moment. Also again it goes back to just because you can survive without survival structures doesn't mean they hold no importance to survival I think your taking your experience as everyone's experience in this scenario. Losing your base effects the survival of most players as not everyone plays like a nomad it's the very reason base destruction mechanics are a thing.

I don't think you're actually talking to me at this point.

Of course losing a base is demoralizing.  A lot of things can happen that absolutely suck all of the joy out of an experience without also causing me to fail.

My entire point - this entire time - is that destroying structures does not make it harder to survive in the game.  You can delete every structure and a player is not really much much likely to die for it.  Of course destroying it all would still affect a player, probably causing annoyance, aggravation, and/or apathy.  Making base destruction common and unavoidable is just putting a player on a treadmill until they are exhausted and quit.  It would probably be one of the absolute worst things Klei could do.  This is why all base destruction has methods to circumvent - whether its summer wildfires, lightning, antlion craters we need some method to say "nope."  This is why immediately as quake2.0 started we got pillars to cut them off.  Destroying a base is one of the deepest cuts - that never kills.  Survival effect - zero - emotional investment at that point - also zero.

tbh - its one of the main reasons boating has gone the way it has.  When boat content first launched it was very fun to put together boat bases, and play on the ocean as pirates and explorers as an alternate way to play the game.  But boat destruction is far too constant for that to last.  Since Klei did not improve boat resilience we have moved only to cheaper and more disposable boats.  People have been critical about the ocean pretty much since its inception in DST, and I think a major point of that is how quickly our investment can be wiped away - and how little that means to our survival, but how much that hurts our enjoyment of the game.

[Mysterious box]

2 minutes ago, Yuuko said:

My entire point - this entire time - is that destroying structures does not make it harder to survive in the game.  You can delete every structure and a player is not really much much likely to die for it.

And my counter argument is that this is just how you feel saying that removing food, resource, and storage structures has zero impact on any player just isn't true and that's the point I'm trying to get across sorry for singling out a single part of your post again but I feel like this is the best way to answer it at this point.

 

4 minutes ago, Yuuko said:

Making base destruction common and unavoidable is just putting a player on a treadmill until they are exhausted and quit. 

Never supported this happening infact I've actively supported the opposite.

 

5 minutes ago, Yuuko said:

It would probably be one of the absolute worst things Klei could do. 

I agree.

 

6 minutes ago, Yuuko said:

This is why all base destruction has methods to circumvent - whether its summer wildfires, lightning, antlion craters we need some method to say "nope."  This is why immediately as quake2.0 started we got pillars to cut them off.  Destroying a base is one of the deepest cuts

I'm completely fine with solutions to destruction mechanics just not permanent ones. I feel like antlion is a good example of a very well designed one. You feed her to avoid her fury or kill her to take out her mechanic for the year.

 

[Yuuko]

1 minute ago, Mysterious box said:

And my counter argument is that this is just how you feel saying that removing food, resource, and storage structures has zero impact on any player just isn't true and that's the point I'm trying to get across sorry for singling out a single part of your post again but I feel like this is the best way to answer it at this point.

It really does destroy a conversation to have 20 cuts all responding as if a post were a series of 1 liners, while avoiding the context.

imo the beauty of antlion is that its common to be in caves during the summer *anyway* and then its just free rocks.  Having to kill antlion every year isn't much, but just how long are you planning to make this list?  We already have quite a few things that can destroy our base if we don't do them, and if people want their bases destroyed they can just not do them.

If you want people to quit a game, continually ramp up the amount of upkeep tasks that get between them and the content they are actually here for.  Stack on more mundane, repetitive tasks, go for it.  I will definitely be playing something else anyway.

 

[Mike23Ua]

1 hour ago, Yuuko said:

It really does destroy a conversation to have 20 cuts all responding as if a post were a series of 1 liners, while avoiding the context.

imo the beauty of antlion is that its common to be in caves during the summer *anyway* and then its just free rocks.  Having to kill antlion every year isn't much, but just how long are you planning to make this list?  We already have quite a few things that can destroy our base if we don't do them, and if people want their bases destroyed they can just not do them.

If you want people to quit a game, continually ramp up the amount of upkeep tasks that get between them and the content they are actually here for.  Stack on more mundane, repetitive tasks, go for it.  I will definitely be playing something else anyway.

 

Alternatively… Klei could actually further develop each game mode preset so that they actually offer different types of experiences with the game.

We have Relaxed, Lights Out, Endless & Survival- and each of these should provide a vastly different type of gameplay experience.

Perhaps it was “Relaxed Mode” that needed the massive nerfs to Moon Quays pirate raids & curse while survival retained its unforgiving original implementation?

Im no game designer or anything but even I know one size does not fit all…

So why the hell are they trying to shoehorn every type of players playstyle under one generic setting?

Even 7 Days to Die was smart enough to let the players choose slow moving classic horror movie zombies, or fast running Day Z type zombie behaviors to satisfy both camps of playstyle.

[Mysterious box]

1 hour ago, Yuuko said:

It really does destroy a conversation to have 20 cuts all responding as if a post were a series of 1 liners, while avoiding the context.

imo the beauty of antlion is that its common to be in caves during the summer *anyway* and then its just free rocks.  Having to kill antlion every year isn't much, but just how long are you planning to make this list?  We already have quite a few things that can destroy our base if we don't do them, and if people want their bases destroyed they can just not do them.

If you want people to quit a game, continually ramp up the amount of upkeep tasks that get between them and the content they are actually here for.  Stack on more mundane, repetitive tasks, go for it.  I will definitely be playing something else anyway.

 

Figured I'd add I already said new survival content doesn't necessarily need to be targeted at destroying bases but are you saying you just don't want any new content based around survival from here on out? Idk I feel like that just leaves new bosses at that point which would be pretty lame in my opinon and only want me to lean harder on more new characters and refreshes I guess.

[Yuuko]

6 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

Figured I'd add I already said new survival content doesn't necessarily need to be targeted at destroying bases but are you saying you just don't want any new content based around survival from here on out? Idk I feel like that just leaves new bosses at that point which would be pretty lame in my opinon and only want me to lean harder on more new characters and refreshes I guess.

I've never opposed new survival content.  I have opposed destroying structures under the guise of survival content.

This thread is about megabasing and my posts have entirely been - destroying someone's mega base is bad, and equally thinking destroying a few structures in this game has any significant effect on survival is wrong.

For the people with little bases, a few crock pots, and an alchemy machine they don't need because they've gained the few recipes they're going to use - It would not mean much to blow these things up because it did not take much to create them.  But also they don't really do much - crock pot foods are more efficient, but you can eat raw foods for about the same gains.  We don't need to sleep, or need to cook, etc.

For the people with massive bases - we're talking about hours upon hours of time spend clearing the game's content time and again to farm up the resources needed to fill out all of these crazy builds.  Destroying structures is entirely too harsh a penalty for someone who has essentially done the entire game multiple times.

Basically structure destruction is bad both ways.  It would barely effect some people, and greatly effect others - and I think its no coincidence which side is asking for it...

If Klei wanted to change this they would need to rework some foundational aspects of the game.  Just tacking it on in the end won't work - we've seen this b/c adding quake2.0, acid rain, and hail all caused them to backpedal and change them.  Its just too far into the game, we've done to much to go back and say "Hey, remember rain?  Yeah, how about THAT again" lol

[Mysterious box]

53 minutes ago, Yuuko said:

I've never opposed new survival content.  I have opposed destroying structures under the guise of survival content.

And I once again disagree here as again people use structures to assist in their survival. I get it you don't and that's fine but your not most people which is why I brought up the axe comparison just because you can doesn't mean everyone can which means yes it does infact effect survival.

55 minutes ago, Yuuko said:

This thread is about megabasing and my posts have entirely been - destroying someone's mega base is bad, and equally thinking destroying a few structures in this game has any significant effect on survival is wrong.

And here's where I draw the line unavoidable base destruction is bad but avoidable base destruction is fine so long as it isn't too overwhelming. Part of survival is protecting your property this even includes other things like your beefalo should you choose to take on that responsibility.

 

1 hour ago, Yuuko said:

For the people with little bases, a few crock pots, and an alchemy machine they don't need because they've gained the few recipes they're going to use - It would not mean much to blow these things up because it did not take much to create them.  But also they don't really do much - crock pot foods are more efficient, but you can eat raw foods for about the same gains.  We don't need to sleep, or need to cook, etc.

For the people with massive bases - we're talking about hours upon hours of time spend clearing the game's content time and again to farm up the resources needed to fill out all of these crazy builds.  Destroying structures is entirely too harsh a penalty for someone who has essentially done the entire game multiple times.

Basically structure destruction is bad both ways.  It would barely effect some people, and greatly effect others - and I think its no coincidence which side is asking for it...

See when people use the excuse people have small bases they pretend a small base has only a few structures but that's just not realistic even for some new players. When you factor in refrigerators, crockpots, chests, craft stations, grass, twigs, a food producer, a lumber area, flingos if your not basing in caves or the Oasis, a lightning rod, and potentially more things a player might use to make survival easier. I know your going to say but you don't really need that but if your argument is you can make survival harder on yourself to ignore all of it then it's just a flawed argument. It's basically like saying why don't we delete all other weapons because we can beat everything with a axe.

 

1 hour ago, Yuuko said:

If Klei wanted to change this they would need to rework some foundational aspects of the game.  Just tacking it on in the end won't work - we've seen this b/c adding quake2.0, acid rain, and hail all caused them to backpedal and change them.  Its just too far into the game, we've done to much to go back and say "Hey, remember rain?  Yeah, how about THAT again" lol

Let's be real klei could have come up with more creative ideas for survival mechanics without rehashing old ideas many have suggested some and the entire game didn't need to change to do it however I think more and more people do agree that the game is in dire need of changes on the foundational level because the current base of dst doesn't really compliment new content the way it should.

[Yuuko]

21 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

And I once again disagree here as again people use structures to assist in their survival. I get it you don't and that's fine but your not most people which is why I brought up the axe comparison just because you can doesn't mean everyone can which means yes it does infact effect survival.

And here's where I draw the line unavoidable base destruction is bad but avoidable base destruction is fine so long as it isn't too overwhelming. Part of survival is protecting your property this even includes other things like your beefalo should you choose to take on that responsibility.

 

See when people use the excuse people have small bases they pretend a small base has only a few structures but that's just not realistic even for some new players. When you factor in refrigerators, crockpots, chests, craft stations, grass, twigs, a food producer, a lumber area, flingos if your not basing in caves or the Oasis, a lightning rod, and potentially more things a player might use to make survival easier. I know your going to say but you don't really need that but if your argument is you can make survival harder on yourself to ignore all of it then it's just a flawed argument. It's basically like saying why don't we delete all other weapons because we can beat everything with a axe.

 

Let's be real klei could have come up with more creative ideas for survival mechanics without rehashing old ideas many have suggested some and the entire game didn't need to change to do it however I think more and more people do agree that the game is in dire need of changes on the foundational level because the current base of dst doesn't really compliment new content the way it should.

I don't think you disagree with me.

Avoidable base destruction is already in the game, in many forms.  We have plenty of it, and TONS of increasingly expensive and involved ways to circumvent it.  The only reason anyone could complain about wanting more base destruction is if they are already avoiding all current forms - which usually means they want unavoidable base destruction.

[cybers2001]

The fact that statues and furniture exist should be pretty obvious at this point they've been catering to base building. We never had any non-functional stuff in DS up until Hamlet came along.

On 12/27/2023 at 7:43 AM, grm9 said:

idk, i'd prefer another boss getting added instead of lunar hail which does nothing, acid rain at least forces you to stay sane using CC crown or use miner hat which does something, unlike lunar hail which you just dodge like earthquakes 

Hail and acid rain definitely don't do nothing. Acid rain is the best source of nitre, and I've never had so many infused moon shards before hail became a thing. The downsides are there to balance the upsides.  

  

Also, on the points about people surviving with as little as 6 structures goes... on the contrary, having more structures means even lower survival-based consequences for base destruction. I have multiple peninsulas in my world that's fully built up within my base, but a lot of it is villages I built, carrat racetracks, cawnival, winter setpieces, etc. If something wanted to destroy my base, it would be these useless but fun things I built that would likely get hit, not anything critical like my storage, kitchen or farm. All it would do is piss me off.

[Mike23Ua]

Okay let me explain it in a way everyone should clearly be able to understand: when you play 7 Days To Die & you build your base to defend yourself from incoming zombies, that works with the most minimalistic base you can build, but it only works up to a certain point… and then the game throws a wave of zombies to assault your base every 7th Day, you can defend, but every subsequent seventh day will see them grow harder and more difficult until EVENTUALLY the game throws Running Flaming Zombies and Acid Spitting Fatty Zombies into those waves whose entire design is strictly to spawn in and deal damage to your base defenses.

Is 7DtD a tower defense game? Well uhh no.. it’s a sandbox survival.

It shares a Similarity with DST in that every 7th Day hounds come after you which climb in numbers as days go up.

However where DST & 7DtD differentiate is that 7DtD’s gameplay loop revolves around defending your base and gathering supplies, and in order for the game to keep that core loop intact: Mobs need to actually be able to damage your base so your forced to go out and gather resources to repair it 

(or have extra resources on hand ahead of time)

Both games share a weather system where the elements can kill you if underprepared, both games require health and hunger management, both games share horde mechanics every 7th day.

But DST goes out of its way to avoid spawning things in your base to deal damage.

You are right about one thing though: It is Too Late to add new destructive mechanics into DST post AFW & CC.

Klei should’ve just made a new game and had these features active from the start.

[cybers2001]

10 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Okay let me explain it in a way everyone should clearly be able to understand: when you play 7 Days To Die & you build your base to defend yourself from incoming zombies, that works with the most minimalistic base you can build, but it only works up to a certain point… and then the game throws a wave of zombies to assault your base every 7th Day, you can defend, but every subsequent seventh day will see them grow harder and more difficult until EVENTUALLY the game throws Running Flaming Zombies and Acid Spitting Fatty Zombies into those waves whose entire design is strictly to spawn in and deal damage to your base defenses.

Is 7DtD a tower defense game? Well uhh no.. it’s a sandbox survival.

It shares a Similarity with DST in that every 7th Day hounds come after you which climb in numbers as days go up.

However where DST & 7DtD differentiate is that 7DtD’s gameplay loop revolves around defending your base and gathering supplies, and in order for the game to keep that core loop intact: Mobs need to actually be able to damage your base so your forced to go out and gather resources to repair it 

(or have extra resources on hand ahead of time)

Both games share a weather system where the elements can kill you if underprepared, both games require health and hunger management, both games share horde mechanics every 7th day.

But DST goes out of its way to avoid spawning things in your base to deal damage.

You are right about one thing though: It is Too Late to add new destructive mechanics into DST post AFW & CC.

Klei should’ve just made a new game and had these features active from the start.

I'd be fine with something like that, but unfortunately we don't actually have reliable base defenses in don't starve.

[Yuuko]

1 hour ago, Mike23Ua said:

You are right about one thing though: It is Too Late to add new destructive mechanics into DST post AFW & CC.

Klei should’ve just made a new game and had these features active from the start.

Its okay for games to be different things.  DST is not a game to have such a thing happen because it wasn't designed for it.  The hound waves were never the interesting or exciting part of DS or DST.  They are more like "Okay I guess I sit here until a hound wave happens so I can finally go do the thing uninterrupted."  The interesting things here were always the cool bosses and other things to do.

ngl for a long time I strictly cave based b/c I could avoid hounds.

[ECS.98]

15 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

However where DST & 7DtD differentiate is that 7DtD’s gameplay loop revolves around defending your base and gathering supplies

Meanwhile DST is not a game about defending your base. There's very little opportunity for you to actually defend the base from anything.

If Bearger or Deerclops spawn inside your base, you can bet your structures will be gone before you can do anything about it. If an area of your base goes up in flames, you better already have a Flingomatic built in it or have a Luxury Fan ready in your inventory (and hope the fan covers the entire area), otherwise everything will burn before you can do anything. If lightning hits your base, you better deal with the flames that come from it, because the only way to defend from lightning is building a Lightning Rod before it happens.

DST destruction is quick and unforgiving, and often happens in a large scale, and the only way to deal with it is working on prevention, rather than defending something from it. The problem with having your base destroyed is that once you realize it, in most cases there's nothing you can do, and you can only blame yourself for not having thought about it 20 days in advance.

[00petar00]

 

On 12/27/2023 at 4:13 PM, Mysterious box said:

There seems to be this idea that there's some huge elitist megabasing and survival faction that exists on this forum but in reality it's usually 2 to 3 people who hate anything related to survival or anything related to megabasing on both sides while the rest of the community blows both sides far out of proportion.

From what I can tell quite a lot of players dislike repeatable chore like survival mechanics and in general survival content is like that. The issue I have is that you don't want permanent solutions like dreadstone pillars in the game when it is going to be much less important for you to have them compared to megabasers.

On 12/27/2023 at 3:20 PM, Mysterious box said:

Noone needs to build to survive but having specific structures does make survival easier therefore there is a point to them being destructible. For greater example noone needs to use anything stronger than a grass suit and a axe for most fights but using stronger gear does make a difference but you techinically could get by on the bare minimum much like a base.

That being said it always feels extremely flawed when I hear people go what's the point of making content that impacts base or resources of the player since survival is too easy when the reason survival is so easy is exactly those things. Often people will even pitch things completely unrelated to survival as solutions saying well this random thing that you'll almost never meet in regular play is far more impactful to your survival than this current thing that's directly impacting how you play.

I don't think megabasing should go away but I do also believe we should be able to have content that actually impacts survival as well for people who still want to play a survival game.

On 12/29/2023 at 9:51 PM, Mysterious box said:

I'm completely fine with solutions to destruction mechanics just not permanent ones. I feel like antlion is a good example of a very well designed one. You feed her to avoid her fury or kill her to take out her mechanic for the year.

Everyone can survive without building much at all, I have played on PVP servers in the early DST days and only had to build alchemy engine a few times to prototype and was able to survive a full year without any problems. The point is that it isn't fun to play like that and punishing players that build does nothing except remove the fun as they will have to think if or how much they should build.

I don't like upkeep/repeatable mechanics and you and many others are completely fine or accepting of antlion as a good addition to the game when it is too repetitive after you kill him over and over until you get tired of it and there's no way to stop it from happening besides messing with world settings.

DST is one of the games that I play that has the most upkeep/repeat/resource sink mechanics out of all of my favorites and it does make me enjoy the game less.

On 12/27/2023 at 4:13 PM, Mysterious box said:

Ironically this is what lead to the hail drama as klei had said they'd tweak acid rain again after adding the barrier which satisfied both sides however the tweak never came which lead to people being more aggressive about them fixing lunar hail rather than sweeping it under the rug like acid rain.

That being said there was definitely talks about the acid rain nerf when it happened you probably just didn't see it as it didn't get as big due to klei saying they would tweak it.

There seems to be this idea that there's some huge elitist megabasing and survival faction that exists on this forum but in reality it's usually 2 to 3 people who hate anything related to survival or anything related to megabasing on both sides while the rest of the community blows both sides far out of proportion.

I don't understand why you bring this up when you agreed with the changes klei did to those mechanics, maybe not to the damage nerf of acid rain as I don't think i've seen you mention that but everything else before Umbralla was added and even hail changes to not kill creatures.

On 12/27/2023 at 11:51 PM, Mysterious box said:

Realistically the only reason for this is because the game lacks a tutorial that teaches you the basics of survival which is all you need to survive early to late game excluding the rifts and if learning the basics destroys the experience then perhaps that's a symptom of a bigger issue.

DST is very difficult to new players and most of the players that are active on the forums over a longer period of time easily have over a thousand hours played. Tutorial won't do much because the game has so much depth and survival on its own will only get you so far, the thing is that most of the survival mechanics usually pile on when you are fighting a boss or exploring and are unable to cope with them if you are far away from the base, that's how most players get overwhelmed.

On 12/28/2023 at 2:03 AM, Mysterious box said:

So storing food in containers that preserve them for longer doesn't decrease the time you spend getting more food? Using chests doesn't decrease the time you spend sorting through your items? Idk it feels like handicapping yourself.

Someone who can survive a full year won't have any problems without preserving food the only thing is that it cuts down on resource management and it does increase your odds to survive if you are in some sticky situation but anyone prepared doesn't need this. This just another cog in the wheel of resource management.

On 12/28/2023 at 9:48 PM, arubaro said:

People rush every boss without making a base but experience players should rebuild some fences and a moondial because it affects survival... logical fun game development 

Yeah it is quite funny how people want base destruction or hail to kill animals when it doesn't affect them.

On 12/29/2023 at 1:33 AM, EATZYOWAFFLEZ said:

Klei isn't offering similar experiences to the base game with DST updates because DST is not the same game that DS was. DST has taken on a separate identity ever since the addition of raid bosses and the shadow/lunar arcs.

Klei is not tiptoeing around pre-existing play styles, but rather players are giving valid criticism to bad mechanics that offer nothing but artificial challenge and annoyance. There's also a large difference between changing an already existing world by adding new features, and making what is essential a completely separate game (Hamlet/SW).

In the last year or two players have become more aware of the annoying mechanics that they have to deal with on the regular basis and it is great to see how it is brought up in discussions like these, we need more people to voice opinions against such further additions to the game.

On 12/29/2023 at 9:51 PM, Mysterious box said:

And my counter argument is that this is just how you feel saying that removing food, resource, and storage structures has zero impact on any player just isn't true and that's the point I'm trying to get across sorry for singling out a single part of your post again but I feel like this is the best way to answer it at this point.

It is quite easy to survive for as long as you want without building but it removes a part of the game that a player can interact with, the point is to improve and make it easier and less resource intensive and it does make survival easier but as usual survival element is going to become less relevant the longer you play and that is another point of playing that long, I don't want to play for 1000 game days and still have to struggle to get any amount of advantage as I did during the first year. Survival sandbox games usually make survival irrelevant the longer you play and the more established you become and DST is one of the games that always require you to put above average amount of effort compared to these games in the late game.

[Mike23Ua]

If Klei just added hostile mobs with poison effects namely hamlets scorpions & snakes so that even just the smallest task of chopping trees for wood could become chaotic when you accidentally get poisoned and then need to stop everything your currently doing to go find a cure would nudge the game in a more survival oriented direction then it currently has.

This is without destroying your pretty little silly decorative base designs…

The thing here though- is that base builders would whine that they’re too intrusive on their Playstyle and not fun, or challenging- Just More Chores.

To me… building a mega base in of itself is a chore… so if I’m going to have chores, why can’t I have fun while having chores?

Just getting the supplies to build a fully upgraded boat is a complete “Chore” all the wood & stone collecting, and oh wait nothing interesting to actually “Fight” with the games multitude of ever expanding weapons and armors besides yup you guessed it- Optional Bosses needing a Specific tool for me to Summon.

Even the new so called “End Game” Boss Variants can be completely Ignored by just burning the Corpse if you don’t want to fight the Armored Variants.

This game has become a shell of the franchise I once enjoyed where just walking onto the wrong floor tile could send arrows through your face, bust open a nearby vase in the process unleashing a deadly venomous mob that was hiding inside in the process.

You can make all the arguments you’d like- but as for me I’m still going to feel like Megabasing killed Dont Starve.

[grm9]

11 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

The thing here though- is that base builders would whine that they’re too intrusive on their Playstyle and not fun, or challenging- Just More Chores

nah they probably wouldn't care because you can kill snakes in two hits using brightshade sword before they hit you

11 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

so that even just the smallest task of chopping trees for wood could become chaotic when you accidentally get poisoned and then need to stop everything your currently doing to go find a cure

or you could just kite and not get poisoned, all enemies that can poison you are extremely easy to avoid since you can stunlock mosquitos and you can walk away from everything except spider warriors and you can just not do the things that make them spawn since there's no reason to fight them and you can walk to the side to avoid their jump either way

11 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

This game has become a shell of the franchise I once enjoyed where just walking onto the wrong floor tile could send arrows through your face, bust open a nearby vase in the process unleashing a deadly venomous mob that was hiding inside in the process

hamlet got released less than 5 years ago and is still there and DST never had that 

[arubaro]

1 hour ago, Mike23Ua said:

If Klei just added hostile mobs with poison effects namely hamlets scorpions & snakes so that even just the smallest task of chopping trees for wood could become chaotic when you accidentally get poisoned and then need to stop everything your currently doing to go find a cure would nudge the game in a more survival oriented direction then it currently has.

This is without destroying your pretty little silly decorative base designs…

The thing here though- is that base builders would whine that they’re too intrusive on their Playstyle and not fun, or challenging- Just More Chores.

To me… building a mega base in of itself is a chore… so if I’m going to have chores, why can’t I have fun while having chores?

Just getting the supplies to build a fully upgraded boat is a complete “Chore” all the wood & stone collecting, and oh wait nothing interesting to actually “Fight” with the games multitude of ever expanding weapons and armors besides yup you guessed it- Optional Bosses needing a Specific tool for me to Summon.

Even the new so called “End Game” Boss Variants can be completely Ignored by just burning the Corpse if you don’t want to fight the Armored Variants.

This game has become a shell of the franchise I once enjoyed where just walking onto the wrong floor tile could send arrows through your face, bust open a nearby vase in the process unleashing a deadly venomous mob that was hiding inside in the process.

You can make all the arguments you’d like- but as for me I’m still going to feel like Megabasing killed Dont Starve.

Arent you asking for a change to willow's fire ball because you destroyed a single structure and did rollback?

[Mysterious box]

18 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

From what I can tell quite a lot of players dislike repeatable chore like survival mechanics and in general survival content is like that. The issue I have is that you don't want permanent solutions like dreadstone pillars in the game when it is going to be much less important for you to have them compared to megabasers.

This is false not going over why this not affecting me is just a lie again just read the old conversation.

18 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

Everyone can survive without building much at all, I have played on PVP servers in the early DST days and only had to build alchemy engine a few times to prototype and was able to survive a full year without any problems. The point is that it isn't fun to play like that and punishing players that build does nothing except remove the fun as they will have to think if or how much they should build.

Everyone can also play by beating nearly all enemies with just a axe therefore no one needs a better weapon than a axe.

18 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

I don't like upkeep/repeatable mechanics and you and many others are completely fine or accepting of antlion as a good addition to the game when it is too repetitive after you kill him over and over until you get tired of it and there's no way to stop it from happening besides messing with world settings.

Then mess with the world settings you've made it very clear you don't like the survival aspect of don't starve together multiple times but I don't understand why that has to be everyone else's problem? No we shouldn't have to lose the survival element of the game in the base game because you don't like survival mechanics especially not well designed ones like antlion. The settings exist for this very reason they are a major part of what a sandbox game is so if you want less survival in your sandbox change it.

19 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

DST is one of the games that I play that has the most upkeep/repeat/resource sink mechanics out of all of my favorites and it does make me enjoy the game less.

Dst is one of the most customizable in this aspect as well with the ability to lessen or straight up remove the negative effects of not managing your stats and/or removing any mechanic you find too tedious to manage it's of no fault of the game that you feel burned out by the game but actively choose not to make use of the tools at you disposal to make the game more enjoyable for you yourself and friends you may play with.

19 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

I don't understand why you bring this up when you agreed with the changes klei did to those mechanics, maybe not to the damage nerf of acid rain as I don't think i've seen you mention that but everything else before Umbralla was added and even hail changes to not kill creatures.

Because it's the truth? This wasn't me saying it was a bad thing just stating the facts.

19 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

DST is very difficult to new players and most of the players that are active on the forums over a longer period of time easily have over a thousand hours played. Tutorial won't do much because the game has so much depth and survival on its own will only get you so far, the thing is that most of the survival mechanics usually pile on when you are fighting a boss or exploring and are unable to cope with them if you are far away from the base, that's how most players get overwhelmed.

Until you remember that many players with thousands of hours don't know most good crockpot dishes, how combat works, how followers work, what's in the caves, whats at sea, how to get gems, how to sleep, how to get a winter hat, how to make their own food source, how to raise their sanity, how to farm, and various other very basic things. A tutorial would change a ton because most of the problems people have when it comes to actually becoming good at the game is learning the very basics but there's a faction of the community who keep trying to prevent this from happening claiming that not knowing the very basics of survival is somehow for the good of the player despite it being where many end up quitting out of frustration. With a very normal interaction being a newbie going in blind dying to something they could not have known about and wasn't prepared for then proceeding to beg to be resurrected with the response being "sure I'll raise you" or "find a way to raise yourself or get kicked" or finally "...". Another outcome being them becoming completely dependent on more experienced players because the resources to learn in a safer environment doesn't really exist for them in both cases becoming a veteran noob who knows very little about the overall game due to fear of upsetting other players on the server. For every player who goes on a forum or a video to learn what you the player would be hard pressed learning organically there are several others who just give up despite the game not being as hard as it seems once you learn the basics. But sure we can just keep gatekeeping basic knowledge if that's the "true" don't starve together experience but we can't keep pretending that don't starve together is just so much harder than every other game and that's the only reason new players have trouble adapting to it. Heck we have actual reviews where the reviewer never learned that kiting was a concept in the game thinking the goal of combat was to get strong armor and hold F.

19 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

Someone who can survive a full year won't have any problems without preserving food the only thing is that it cuts down on resource management and it does increase your odds to survive if you are in some sticky situation but anyone prepared doesn't need this. This just another cog in the wheel of resource management.

Someone can also survive a full year without weapons or armor doesn't mean they don't make a big impact on their survival and gameplay experience not having them no? Yes as I've said I'm aware you can survive without these things in your base but having them and not does make a big impact on your survival and gameplay experience just because it doesn't effect you doesn't mean it doesn't effect other people.

19 hours ago, 00petar00 said:

It is quite easy to survive for as long as you want without building but it removes a part of the game that a player can interact with, the point is to improve and make it easier and less resource intensive and it does make survival easier but as usual survival element is going to become less relevant the longer you play and that is another point of playing that long, I don't want to play for 1000 game days and still have to struggle to get any amount of advantage as I did during the first year. Survival sandbox games usually make survival irrelevant the longer you play and the more established you become and DST is one of the games that always require you to put above average amount of effort compared to these games in the late game.

What your asking for here is for dst to become worse what's the point of being in survival mode if all aspects of survival disappear? At that point why not just make a creative mode if the end goal is for the game to just start playing itself? Personally I don't get where this above average effort your talking about comes in I think you might just be experiencing burn out and want a more relaxed experience but the game already offers this.

[prettynuggets]

sandbox game ending with megabasing is unavoidable.
if the reason for u hating megabaser just because we defend our structure, and what is so wrong by ask for protection to the new destructive mechanic which game always provided player things as counter mechanic anyway. if u hate how people using dreadstone pillar to counter boulder, why u still using lightning rod? it was completely nullify one of most destructive mechanic as well, why not barking to this ? its so cheap and its not like people is forced to nurse knobbly tree to nullify the mechanic. it doesn't even locked behind any special blueprint/resources. 
 

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

what's the point of being in survival mode if all aspects of survival disappear?

it just the way it is there is no way a survival game without counter mechanic, game called dont starve have solution called - food -, we have as simple as hound trap for hound wave
oasis, knobbly tree, flingomatic for wildfire, lightning rod for lightning.. imagine u have hunger as survival mechanic but doesnt have food? is having food as counter mechanic will make aspect of survival disappear?


people saying building being destroyed is not affecting anyone, u can just rebuild. but many of people playing this game, even new player, bases is the reflective on how much they were surviving. one of streamer group that tried Dont starve together having their whole year of progress destroyed by bearger. does it fun ? seeing all 9 hours of gameplay destroyed just because u dont know what bearger is? just because it is going for fridge in middle of their base?  it is sad and demoralizing them to play more of this game. also more of people who play megabase, the way thriving is on their pretty little build. having destructive mechanic without counter is just like forcing them to close this game and never play again what so ever. concentrating when placing builds is not just one click but few dragging and changing view to see if they placed correctly . many of us hammering things down just because we hate the way it looks after placing it.  so dont dare to say that if building get destroyed it will just cost a little thing to replace em. our time is not a cheap resources.
its not like we have a specific layouts to place things, many of builds is incorporated with natural things that exist since beginning having it build once will not make it easy to rebuild it for second time. which make them unique and different each time we start in new world.

as i said every survival mechanic will have solution, things which make game annoying or not is basically ur choice, either use the counter mechanic or just suffer. 

extra:
the only time i find the game is called dont starve is when im in late game, building things . most recent death of my run is basically because im too concentrating on building and forgot i have hunger meter. building is the real survival challenge.    i just realized its on my 1234 days of surviving lmao.


 

[Yuuko]

2 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

Everyone can also play by beating nearly all enemies with just a axe therefore no one needs a better weapon than a axe.

 

This is really not a good counter argument.  It just does not relate to structures.

What we are saying is that base destruction already exists, and will always have counters because forced base destruction is bad.

If someone was saying "Playing Wolfgang makes the game too easy damage is too high" we could say "Just play with an axe then."  This is a valid response because they DO have the ability to reduce their damage if they feel they have too much.  Many people have done boss runs with Wes - so it is something that people already do.

Similarly if someone says "We need base destruction mechanics" the response is "play without destruction prevention."  Like fr just don't build flingo, or lightning rod.  Don't plant tall tree over your base.  Don't go to caves during summer.  While you're at it don't use strong winter gear or thermal stones.  You can easily degrade the experience to your liking - there is no reason to force this on anyone else.  Challenge runs are totally valid and people do them, make a base challenge run where you do not build any base prevention.  While you're at it, fight Bearger and Deerclops in your kitchen for maximum impress.

And no - we don't need a longer chore list.  Antlion is only great b/c I can go to the caves and get free rocks.  Otherwise its like "Oh crap, I gotta stop everything I'm doing to go kill this one dumb boss."  One boss like this is plenty, we do not need more.

[Mysterious box]

3 hours ago, Yuuko said:

This is really not a good counter argument.  It just does not relate to structures.

What we are saying is that base destruction already exists, and will always have counters because forced base destruction is bad

At no point did I say we shouldn't be able to resist base destruction every existing mechanic related to destruction has a counter currently why would you assume that if we hypothetically added a new one we suddenly would only have a fail state that we couldn't interact with? What I said was base is related to survival and what you guys are saying is "well um actually you could hypothetically survive without a base" which is why I keep using the axe argument because the logic is completely the same you could in theory survive with just a axe does that mean you never need another weapon? Heck you could survive without a weapon so does that mean weapons are suddenly worthless in terms of staying alive? That's literally the argument you guys are making about survival structures and it's just baffling to me.

3 hours ago, Yuuko said:

Similarly if someone says "We need base destruction mechanics" the response is "play without destruction prevention."  Like fr just don't build flingo, or lightning rod.  Don't plant tall tree over your base.  Don't go to caves during summer.  While you're at it don't use strong winter gear or thermal stones.  You can easily degrade the experience to your liking - there is no reason to force this on anyone else.  Challenge runs are totally valid and people do them, make a base challenge run where you do not build any base prevention.  While you're at it, fight Bearger and Deerclops in your kitchen for maximum impress.

And no - we don't need a longer chore list.  Antlion is only great b/c I can go to the caves and get free rocks.  Otherwise its like "Oh crap, I gotta stop everything I'm doing to go kill this one dumb boss."  One boss like this is plenty, we do not need more.

Now I'll once again say I'm not saying we need more mechanics specifically aimed at base destruction than we already have but going by your very logic right here if you have a problem with more mechanics being added all you need to do is not activate the rifts. However going by what your saying here it seems like your goal is to insult peoples intelligence because what your basically saying here is the equivalent of saying we're too stupid to realize the difference between new content and just intentionally doing stupid things. It's like telling people who want a crockpot rebalance there's no problem with the crockpot simply make larger amounts of the bad dishes and bam now they work just as well as the good ones it's condescending and would piss people off right?

4 hours ago, prettynuggets said:

if u hate how people using dreadstone pillar to counter boulder

Except my only issue with it stemmed from it being a late game mechanic that has a instant permanent solution that aside I wasn't really a big fan of the boulder mechanic itself.

4 hours ago, prettynuggets said:

why u still using lightning rod?

This is like asking someone why they fight bosses with armor.

4 hours ago, prettynuggets said:

it just the way it is there is no way a survival game without counter mechanic, game called dont starve have solution called - food -, we have as simple as hound trap for hound wave
oasis, knobbly tree, flingomatic for wildfire, lightning rod for lightning.. imagine u have hunger as survival mechanic but doesnt have food? is having food as counter mechanic will make aspect of survival disappear?

Never asked for the game to not let you fight against survival elements because that's defeats the purpose of surviving against them that being said basically everything you just mentioned has a compromise aside from lightning rods which doesn't ask for one specifically because there's no other way to prevent lightning strikes on your base.

 

4 hours ago, prettynuggets said:

people saying building being destroyed is not affecting anyone, u can just rebuild. but many of people playing this game, even new player, bases is the reflective on how much they were surviving. one of streamer group that tried Dont starve together having their whole year of progress destroyed by bearger. does it fun ? seeing all 9 hours of gameplay destroyed just because u dont know what bearger is? just because it is going for fridge in middle of their base?  it is sad and demoralizing them to play more of this game. also more of people who play megabase, the way thriving is on their pretty little build. having destructive mechanic without counter is just like forcing them to close this game and never play again what so ever. concentrating when placing builds is not just one click but few dragging and changing view to see if they placed correctly . many of us hammering things down just because we hate the way it looks after placing it.  so dont dare to say that if building get destroyed it will just cost a little thing to replace em. our time is not a cheap resources.
its not like we have a specific layouts to place things, many of builds is incorporated with natural things that exist since beginning having it build once will not make it easy to rebuild it for second time. which make them unique and different each time we start in new world.

So I do want to repeat since it seems like it keeps going over people's heads that I do feel we should be able to defend our bases that was never a point I argued against what I said was we shouldn't get a passive solution for every mechanic heck I've even mentioned in the past I'd be fine with increasingly more items like the crystalizer which perma deals with the negative effects of pre rift mechanics so long as we get new mechanics in their place my main issue stems from what we get a new mechanic with a completely automated solution but that aside.

Losing your base is demoralizing but that's because your base is proof of your efforts towards survival and lets be real no matter how much you guys like to believe otherwise most people even survival player's bases aren't just a few random structures placed without care it takes a lot of space to make use not just survival crafts but food producers and boss structures so no matter who you are failing to protect your base is painful (unless your part of the supposed to exist players who play 100s of days without a base or building anything at all but I'm super skeptical a real person who legitimately plays that way exists). And it's meant to be painful and demoralizing when you fail because it's our job to defend our home which leads to the feeling of accomplishment for successfully doing so it's the risk that gives the feeling of being rewarded. For example if you played the game on super god mode with free crafting and a mod that made structures indestructible would you get the same enjoyment as playing the game normally? Would people even consider boss fights, surviving x amount of days, or megabasing special under those circumstances? I mean it definitely would be a more relaxed way to play but there's a reason people don't do that and such a thing tends not to be standard in most games.

[prettynuggets]

20 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

This is like asking someone why they fight bosses with armor.

nope, its two different concept. if u not using lightning rod u cant prevent when u are getting struck by lightning and burning your surrounding area.
while armor u can basically can do fight without it if your kiting is on top tier. 

20 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

xcept my only issue with it stemmed from it being a late game mechanic that has a instant permanent solution

elaborate on this, simple mechanic that exist like lightning, wild fire, food, temp, that can be done with not so instant and permanent solution ? i wanna see if you given the power to design it what do u see fit to have a challenge with no instant permanent solution ? (what ever that is u referering to since it took 44  dreadstone to make permanent pillar i guess its not so instant already?)
since i know all survival aspect in this game is easy enough to counter already. and as cheap as couple of rock and gold can prevent such event permanently

20 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

And it's meant to be painful and demoralizing when you fail because it's our job to defend our home which leads to the feeling of accomplishment for successfully doing so it's the risk that gives the feeling of being rewarded.

so is that so wrong to use counter mechanic to permanently defend such challenge ? if this your argument is basically saying, counter mechanic is needed to defend ur home and have it not destroyed will give us the feeling of being rewarded? 
now how u defend such a thing if the counter mechanic is not presented like when pillar was not exist? or when rift spawn in middle of someone base? with no counter mechanic is it just like RNG dooms day when u just wait and let it happen when the game said so?