Tall chests max limit per slot [poll]

[Maxil20]

7 hours ago, arubaro said:

Agree but just by curiousity, why you didnt use a lure plant to destroy the excess of items? You know you wont use it

I’ll be honest, that’s by far the best thing I could do with like 80% with the shards, but there’s just something stopping me from doing it. I guess I never was one to throw out items in games when they might have a use later, even if I know I’m never going to realistically use the shards for anything close to the amount I have. It’s just a thing I’ve always struggled with, I suppose.

[Captain_Rage]

2 hours ago, Faintly Macabre said:

Yes, we remember. We remember it being an incredible, time-consuming chore that still resulted in an unpleasant and unwieldy storage solution. We remember it becoming utterly trivial as an exercise in resourcefulness because things like the Bearger and the Old Bell were implemented in Don't Starve nearly 10 years ago.

It is still amusing to see newer players getting overzealous and overproducing food on public servers just to have most of it go to waste. xdd Realizing this is one of the milestones of becoming a seasoned player in my opinion. On the other hand there is a fraction of players whose favorite activity simply is farming which is also amusing. They go crazy producing food for the sake of it.

[Copyafriend]

Here is one thing to note: if the chest were to become limited to a 999 stack, it would by necessity (because otherwise it’s pointless) also be cheaper than the equivalent in regular chests (1000 storage for most items is 25 chests or 75 boards, not incredibly hard to obtain)

[HeatAndRun]

What about examining the stack and the  character actually counts the amount by their quotes?

[goatt]

14 hours ago, Masked Koopa said:

I don't think anything is gained from removing the ginormous capacity, while a lot of practicality is lost. I wouldn't want the capacity to be lowered for something like immersion. If a + symbol is added I think that'd be enough.

I agree that 3x3 chests bring lots of immersion. It's a management game that I think it should keep.

But this immersion is only for early, mid or mid-late game.

When it's a late late game, or when it's a megabase, 3x3 chests, that is what brought immersion, will break the immersion in those cases.

So 3x3 chests are not always good for immersion.

What's more, allowing stuff to stack in one slot can reduce lag. Lag will also break immersion.

Nonetheless, I hope early game should have regular 3x3 chests exclusively, because that's the standard DST experience that I want.

I hope this chest update is a late game addition, rather than a chest re-work.

[gamehun20]

1 minute ago, goatt said:

hope this chest update is a late game addition, rather than a chest re-work.

It's a late game upgrade supposedly 

[00petar00]

Some people are complaining just to complain when this doesn't make game easier in any way.

Klei has focused on reducing lag in this update and it seems that items create a lot of lag so they decided to make it so you can stack 1 of the same item in the same slot for the whole duration of the playthrough.

10 hours ago, MondayNight said:

Remember when people were farming wood in bulk via various methods to build adequate storage to their needs? That will be out the window, an activity tied to Survival in the sense it subtracts time and resources (also somewhat dangerous, be it Ents/Bearger + cumulative detrimental factos, etc). And was directly proportional to the amount of hoarding one might engage with. Now you'll solely need 3 Boards and I presume, if tied to Junkyard Werepig, some Junk and possibly an Ark Spark and/or some Rare gems (1-2). Given nowadays, thanks to the season-and-resources-type limiters being removed due to lobbying, one can rush CC 1st Autumn/Winter, Endless pubs - for those is where I for one exclusively play and observe such behaviors - will be in end-game content by 1st Spring/Summer, rushers mentality (the same ones that after defeating CC and opening Rifts, delog to never come back on that server iteration - casuals/newbies have fun with Shades). And will be that easy/quick to get the "endless" Big Chests going. Namely hoarding promoted with a very small space requirement for their placement, storing huge quantities of materials. That's the factual issue here.

How many of the players that make 100+ chests on each of their worlds are having fun gathering logs? It is just a chore and I play DST to have fun which might seem like a word you have seen for the first time here.

Players with better computers can drop everything on floor and it won't cause any lag to them while the same can't be said about most hosted servers that you can find, if you put all of items gathered in 500+ days on the floor it could cause massive lag.

If my goal was to hoard items and hide them from other players I would drop them in the corner of swamp in caves and place even more spider nests in the front or wall the items between 4 pillars and no one would find them. Why would a player want to hide items? If their goal is to grief you there are ways to make permanent damage to the world that you can't recover without console commands.

Edited March 5 by 00petar00

[EATZYOWAFFLEZ]

That last question took way too long for me to understand. About had an aneurism.

9 minutes ago, 00petar00 said:

Some people are complaining just to complain when this doesn't make game easier in any way.

Never doubt the Klei forums.

[SilentConstruct]

Having a stack well past 999 only display as 999 feels jank, off-putting, and should not be something that's treated as normal. Even the sprite of the chest itself, while amusing, feels a little out of place.

I want to be clear that I am completely okay with, and even in favour of near-infinite storage, but I would like a rough idea of how many items is actually in a stack, and since Klei cannot display 47,831 logs as 47.8K logs due to technical limitations, please limit the stack size to 999.

[Faintly Macabre]

1 hour ago, EATZYOWAFFLEZ said:

That last question took way too long for me to understand. About had an aneurism.

Bro it's not a good poll question if you can understand it on the first read and one of the options doesn't not-so-subtly make the pollee seem like an unreasonable jerk

11 minutes ago, SilentConstruct said:

Having a stack well past 999 only display as 999 feels jank, off-putting, and should not be something that's treated as normal.

It is in fact pretty normal for UI elements in cramped spaces to take visual shortcuts like these. If it's really so important to know exactly how many logs you have past 999, a tooltip or something on mouse/cursor over can deliver this information just fine.

[. . .]

5 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

one of the options doesn't not-so-subtly make the pollee seem like an unreasonable jerk

That's rich saying I'm an unreasonable jerk for no reason when I've seen you on basically every thread of people saying they don't like that the stack goes beyond 999 and its number doesn't reflect that and you aggressively keep replying to them to say they're wrong and there opinion is invalid.

And you're saying I'm an unreasonable jerk for literally making a poll? Now that's unreasonable and I dare say jerk-like too.

Edited March 6 by . . .

[Faintly Macabre]

23 minutes ago, . . . said:

things

Bro go look up the word pollee.

[Echsrick]

i still feel like that the scaled chest sould have gotten the stack upgrate....like people allready are not using it so at least with the stack thing people probably would think of actualy using a scaled chest....another thing that has been robbed in this dragons year...

[. . .]

53 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

Bro go look up the word pollee.

Okay, my bad I didn't know cause adding something like -ee at the end of something can make it look like you're referring to someone and it had poll so I thought you were referring to me.

Though you're still saying then 

1 hour ago, Faintly Macabre said:

one of the options doesn't not-so-subtly make the pollee seem like an unreasonable jerk

one of the options I put makes the one voting in the poll seem like an unreasonable jerk which would make me an unreasonable jerk so it's basically the same thing like you're saying I'm an unreasonable jerk, bro.

I don't even understand how any of these questions can be seen that way I literally asked

• What cap for item stacksize per slot in the tall chest do you prefer?
• Would you like/prefer the stack's displayed amount  (the numbers) being true to the actual amount if it goes beyond 999+?
• Would a stack of 999+ items is displayed number amount (the numbers) being accurate to the actual amount in the stack such as 1,000 make it more immersive for you instead of it being 1k items but only stuck at 999 regardless of how much more the stack is

none of these questions seem to me that I'm making anyone seem like an unreasonable jerk. In simple I'm literally asking, what you want stack size be, you want numbers to show real number of stacksize, do you like immersion or don't care

None of those are bad questions.

 

Though I am saddened it seems quite a lot of people don't seem to care about things being refined and polished, but that doesn't mean I see people who voted against what I feel like it should be as unreasonable jerks or that it makes them as such.

 

Cause it is my personal belief if such a small thing is attention to detail can't even be done properly to be immersive then in the future it will lead to bigger things getting less polish as well since the developers will just feel like "this doesn't need to look good the players will play anyways" basically like how Pokemon is right now which Gamefreak knows they can release a super buggy uninspired game and it will sell like hotcakes so they don't put any effort anymore into making the game as great as it could be.

Edited March 6 by . . .

[Faintly Macabre]

58 minutes ago, . . . said:

Though I am saddened it seems quite a lot of people don't seem to care about things being refined and polished

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're framing things that don't suit you as objectively less good, like saying if people don't mind that the counter doesn't give the information you think it should that they don't care about things being refined and polished when they may just disagree that simplifying the display of information for the sake of keeping the UI looking tidy is leaving anything unrefined or unpolished.

You did the exact same thing with the third poll question: you made a compound question with at least one possible answer that doesn't fit yes or no, and the only remaining option is "I don't care about immersion," which is just blatantly poisoning the well. This is a thing I've seen a lot of people do in their polls on this forum and it's lame.

Edited March 6 by Faintly Macabre

[MondayNight]

On 3/5/2024 at 3:51 PM, grm9 said:

that still doesn't explain why can't you just put stuff onto the ground, there's no difference between a billion rot in a chest and a billion of rot dropped on the ground close to each other...

If your habit is littering, then yes, not even an "infinite capacity" chest will change that: tidiness just isn't your thing. We don't discuss particular niche playing styles, like minimal nomad - because that simply doesn't intersect with building bases and storage. I've seen over time many types of nomads (I'm a semi-nomad as well), some using a "dumping ground" for loot, others picking what they're interested in and leaving rest of mob/boss loot on spot it dropped, others placing a boat platform and dumping everything on it, etc. There were, certainly, those making a few chests beside some research station(s) (mostly placed randomly too). All mentioned aren't the ones this change caters to and frankly I don't see the point to bringing them up. Of course someone not interested even in basic building - won't even go into the aesthetic aspect - will not care about chests being finite or infinite and whatever in between. Like I for one don't care about sailing or what happens on the ocean - I acknowledge it exists, is lacking, has issues and that's about it as a dive into such subject.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 3:51 PM, grm9 said:

that sounds as absurd as blaming people for playing until winter even though it'd be harder for newbies to survive during it

As absurd as it may sound, every (lobbied) change brings consequences for bulk player-base at large in various degrees. Like what happened on this lane in one of the big (if not the biggest - most number of community servers excluding CHN, active moderation, high number of players and recurrent players, etc) DST community out there, best summarized in the following picture:

This "CC/Rifts rushing" problem became so prevalent across Endless servers now even admins/moderators had to step in with new rules. And is a direct consequence of certain people lobbying for "lifting of the seasonal limiter" on it (happened), now same lobbying for early manifestation of the Celestial Orb (in process of happening). Not to mention all those rusher videos one can find online. I'm not against those existing, is a natural happening in the free marketplace of ideas, has validity. What am underlining are the named consequences, as stated, for bulk player-base at large, as a potential issue (beside game design philosophy, as written above). Remains to be seen what "side effects" actual gaming will bring for "infinite capacity chests". I can speculate, based on the example I've previously gave, how they could be used for crashing servers (alongside the exacerbation of hording behavior) - for now that's solely speculation, but not without basis.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 3:51 PM, grm9 said:

all of these except character changes didn't even change balance, i still never use bananas bushes, don't have crockpots by the time i get bearger bin and likely still won't use chests after the billion items per slot chests get added

You may not, but Endless pubs tell another story: there isn't any community base out there that in mid-to-late game (sometimes even early game - see the rushers argument) doesn't have Stone Fruit and Banana Bushes. They're just that good and convenient. For anyone that's not Wigfrid, Banana Shakes + Polar Bin is most convenient sanity management system en large among experienced players atm.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 3:58 PM, arubaro said:

I think this is the dumbest example you could bring... is just a QoL item to dont use bundle wrap but you dont need to wait until killing CC and the 3 possesed bosses to have a better food storage item but to simply kill BQ in the 1st autumn...

1st: it goes a long way not insulting posters (see Guidelines) within your comments, even in implied format - I've noticed you over time doing quite so, especially related to Mike's interactions. I get it, "being edgy sells". But not when wanting to make pertinent, substantialized arguments - it only comes as "bratty", like a perpetually angered/jaded person. 2nd, you are factually wrong, on convenience account: Polar Bin preserves complete dishes stacks for the in-game year in fresh format, you just pop it, eat, go your merry way. Meanwhile for Wrapped Bundles you will consume stacks of Ropes in the process, depending on your wants and needs. Polar Bin purely and simply bypasses need to gather materials (Cut Grass), an aspect tied to Survival no matter how menial or trivial you may consider it. And with that, the need for Bundle Wraps on short-to-mid term, aka what is useful for most people.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 4:02 PM, Faintly Macabre said:

Yes, we remember. We remember it being an incredible, time-consuming chore that still resulted in an unpleasant and unwieldy storage solution. We remember it becoming utterly trivial as an exercise in resourcefulness because things like the Bearger and the Old Bell were implemented in Don't Starve nearly 10 years ago.

That was part of DS's ethos. And a change of it only shows how much DST departs from its origins once more. Remain to be seen how good that will be en large and on long term - yes, judging from how hard a lot of you posters here advocate for basically "broken Workshop mod"-type directions, probably popular (certainly in tune with most popular mods out there, in general server populace, namely "999+ inventories" for both character and storage spaces). For me the "straw that broke the camel's back" is precisely this "999-items-per-slot" and I've "voiced" my concerns. That's that. Such cases.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 4:02 PM, Faintly Macabre said:

Slippery slope arguments suck.

Very subjective assessment - will stop at that.

Edited March 23 by MondayNight

[goblinball]

On 3/5/2024 at 2:58 AM, goatt said:

I want the number to be displayed as "999+".

But when hovered, the slot will show me the actual number.

Genius.

Edited March 6 by goblinball

[Faintly Macabre]

2 hours ago, MondayNight said:

That was part of DS's ethos.

It is quite telling for someone arguing against this horrible, awful change to characterize the game's ethos as "incredible, time-consuming chores."

2 hours ago, MondayNight said:

Very subjective assessment - will stop at that.

No, it's not. The slippery slope is the cornerstone of manipulating people's fears to get one's way and more often than not becomes a literal fallacy. It would be one of the worst rhetorical devices in existence if it wasn't so damned effective.

2 hours ago, MondayNight said:

If your habit is littering, then yes, not even an "infinite capacity" chest will change that: tidiness just isn't your thing. We don't discuss particular niche playing styles, like minimal nomad - because that simply doesn't intersect with building bases and storage. I've seen over time many types of nomads (I'm a semi-nomad as well), some using a "dumping ground" for loot, others picking what they're interested in and leaving rest of mob/boss loot on spot it dropped, others placing a boat platform and dumping everything on it, etc. There were, certainly, those making a few chests beside some research station(s) (mostly placed randomly too). All mentioned aren't the ones this change caters to and frankly I don't see the point to bringing them up. Of course someone not interested even in basic building - won't even go into the aesthetic aspect - will not care about chests being finite or infinite and whatever in between. Like I for one don't care about sailing or what happens on the ocean - I acknowledge it exists, is lacking, has issues and that's about it as a dive into such subject.

"I don't want to talk about how other people play, just how I and other correct people play."

Edited March 6 by Faintly Macabre

[. . .]

13 hours ago, Faintly Macabre said:

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're framing things that don't suit you as objectively less good, like saying if people don't mind that the counter doesn't give the information you think it should that they don't care about things being refined and polished

No, I'm not. Objectively if you don't want accurate numbers to show up for something then that means you don't care about it being refined and polished. Imagine if the HP bar just showed you have 100 hp always if you're beyond it or 100+ and when you're below it shows < 100 hp, that would be unpolished and unrefined cause it's not showing the actual number. It's objectively the same here having item stack number get stuck at 999 when it actually is 182,393,312,378,999,666,420 is unrefined and unpolished. Either the cap should be something reasonable or the number should reflect the real number of the stack realistically nobody is going to have a stack going over 4 digits even in a day 999,999+ world that isn't using console command to spawn in giant stacks and if they do I don't want to imagine what will happen to their world if they accidentally hammer or some mob breaks the chest holding more than 4-digits in items it would probably corrupt the world lol.

13 hours ago, Faintly Macabre said:

they may just disagree that simplifying the display of information for the sake of keeping the UI looking tidy is leaving anything unrefined or unpolished.

I fail to understand why you're making it as if more digits on an itemstack can't look polished or refined? That would be up to the klei devs to make it look polished and refined, just as before crafting recipes looked unrefined and unpolished when you'd have a recipe with more than 3 items it would start going off the crafting bar and then they polished it and you can have dozen of items in a recipe now.

 

13 hours ago, Faintly Macabre said:

You did the exact same thing with the third poll question: you made a compound question with at least one possible answer that doesn't fit yes or no, and the only remaining option is "I don't care about immersion," which is just blatantly poisoning the well.

I don't understand what you're saying here but I can tell you're basically accusing me of a bunch of things you made up about me in your head which is not nice. I'd also like to remind you you indirectly accused me of being an unreasonable jerk which is also not nice. So I have to assume you're not a very nice individual. 

So, I don't think we should reply to each other anymore so I will block you now, have a good day and I hope in the future you will not accuse people and slander them with unfounded insults and accusations.

[BalkanCockroach]

9 minutes ago, . . . said:

I don't want to imagine what will happen to their world if they accidentally hammer or some mob breaks the chest holding more than 4-digits in items it would probably corrupt the world lol.

*pc turns into a black hole*

Also devs should've tought about something to prevent this cause if not it's a huge oversight. 

Edited March 6 by BalkanCockroach

[. . .]

1 minute ago, BalkanCockroach said:

*pc turns into a black hole*

Fr, I've been on servers which literally crashed from exploding stone fruit or my own personal server with friends which we spawn in like 9999 items and the world freezes for a few minutes. They're probably going to make the chest not able to be destroyed or can only be destroyed in a special way to circumvent this otherwise I could see a lot of people's worlds turn unplayable if they somehow got an insane stacksize legit in those chests. And especially if they are playing on 32-bit version of the game lol

I remember in Don't Starve hamlet I had a world which I logged out in a savanna cause it was very laggy and it had multiple of those tall grass fields and then I literally couldn't rejoin the world cause I guess there was just too many entities and it would freeze when it loaded 

[Faintly Macabre]

12 minutes ago, . . . said:

No, I'm not. Objectively if you don't want accurate numbers to show up for something then that means you don't care about it being refined and polished.

[...]

I don't understand what you're saying here but I can tell you're basically accusing me of a bunch of things you made up about me in your head which is not nice. I'd also like to remind you you indirectly accused me of being an unreasonable jerk which is also not nice. So I have to assume you're not a very nice individual. 

This was so predictable it hurts.

[BalkanCockroach]

7 minutes ago, . . . said:

They're probably going to make the chest not able to be destroyed or can only be destroyed in a special way

If that's the case then they need to make scaled chests upgradable too. Or maybe the upgrade just makes the chest fireproof but then what's the point of scaled chests apart form the extra 3 slots?

These are big QoL changes they should've given themselves more time.

[Faintly Macabre]

1 minute ago, BalkanCockroach said:

These are big QoL changes they should've given themselves more time.

If only they were going to beta test it to get players to use it and fiddle with it and identify issues and solutions before they were going to push it to all players of the game.

[BalkanCockroach]

2 minutes ago, Faintly Macabre said:

If only they were going to beta test it to get players to use it and fiddle with it and identify issues and solutions before they were going to push it to all players of the game.

I mean they are still gonna release a beta once everything is done.

Edited March 6 by BalkanCockroach