would you just stop destroying my base pls

[Mike23Ua]

2 hours ago, gaymime said:

i turn fire hounds off because accidents happen. klei understands this and often account for this kind of thing. why does the idea bother you?

You do know that even if you turn Firehound spawning to off that a dead ghost player can still haunt normal hounds to get them to turn into firehounds right??

This game to put it into the nicest words I possibly can, despite being a Multiplayer game…. Is in actuality- one of the worst games to play in Multiplayer.

ESPECIALLY if your like me and don’t trust ANYONE..

I don’t get why people are complaining so much about this Giant Worms destructive capabilities, I guess they’ve never played long enough to have someone intentionally get either Eye of Terror or Twins of Terror to Phase 2 (the phase that can destroy base structures) and then for “fun & giggles” playing a literal in-game version of spin the bottle to see who the boss decides it wants to visit for the night.

I swear sometimes it’s like people forget what type of game their actually playing…

But at this point Klei would be better off adding a world Gen toggle so people can have indestructible bases (hahahaha sooooo many A.I. Exploits with pathfinding will ensue!) and on default, destruction like it should have.

[abrocator]

Forced encounters have always been bad game design and bandaid. I’m pretty sure hound waves were introduced back when you could survive off berries in autumn and rabbits in winter.

They are not engaging. They’re just a nuisance and a pest.

Hamlet had the right idea with the Aporkalypse. (Of course it had bat waves, annoyingly.) There’s a threat that you have to proactively work against before it hits. Which forces you into uncomfortable biomes like the deep jungle during uuuuh misty season with all the hatching bugs.

Good design is when you are forced by your own volition into dangerous situations because you have to get something before it’s too late. Or you force yourself into dangerous situations because you are greedy. The better you are at planning ahead the better you are at survival because you can see five steps ahead and very seldom have to be forced into situations that are not favorable to you (to your survival or whatever).

Meanwhile all the waves in this game are just annoying busywork that hangs over you (will it happen three days from now, five…).

11 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

I swear sometimes it’s like people forget what type of game their actually playing…

They’re playing a game (the beta) which you can’t play.

[Evelo]

You get a warning that the Depth Worms are coming, don't stay in base when you hear the impending attack.

Do not change Klei.

[cybers2001]

3 hours ago, Fish boy said:

I feel like this is kinda on you here. do you want fire hounds changed because they burn your base? Id assume not because you get plenty warning to just... walk away from base?

Fire hounds aren’t remotely at the same level. I’ve never had issues with fire hounds in my 8000 day world because they get shredded by houndiuses in my panic room surrounded with statues and Dragonscale turf.

Meanwhile one wormy boi will just annihilate the statues, houndiuses, and then everything else.

[Mysterious box]

12 minutes ago, abrocator said:

Forced encounters have always been bad game design and bandaid. I’m pretty sure hound waves were introduced back when you could survive off berries in autumn and rabbits in winter.

They are not engaging. They’re just a nuisance and a pest.

Hamlet had the right idea with the Aporkalypse. (Of course it had bat waves, annoyingly.) There’s a threat that you have to proactively work against before it hits. Which forces you into uncomfortable biomes like the deep jungle during uuuuh misty season with all the hatching bugs.

Good design is when you are forced by your own volition into dangerous situations because you have to get something before it’s too late. Or you force yourself into dangerous situations because you are greedy. The better you are at planning ahead the better you are at survival because you can see five steps ahead and very seldom have to be forced into situations that are not favorable to you (to your survival or whatever).

Meanwhile all the waves in this game are just annoying busywork that hangs over you (will it happen three days from now, five…).

They’re playing a game (the beta) which you can’t play.

I would argue people would hate a aporkalypse style event far more than hound waves and I also disagree that they're bad game design while never a major components have been used in quite afew survival games and can be fun little events to mix things up.

[grm9]

9 minutes ago, Evelo said:

You get a warning that the Depth Worms are coming, don't stay in base when you hear the impending attack.

Do not change Klei

you literally can't if your base's big enough and you'ren't playing as 1 out of 2 characters that can teleport in caves without another player doing some thing for that or going to an immovable structure that you could be too far away from to go through it before it'll spawn

day 100 or more worm waves got a 30 seconds warning iirc so you pretty much need a beefalo to get out of a mega base and even it might not be fast enough

[cybers2001]

5 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

I would argue people would hate a aporkalypse style event far more than hound waves and I also disagree that they're bad game design while never a major components have been used in quite afew survival games and can be fun little events to mix things up.

I think timed events are fine. Deerclops existing back in vanilla made sense as a chance end-of-winter surprise to screw over a player’s base just in time for the mild season to return so they can rebuild. Even RoG felt cognizant of themed destruction in the way Bearger would conveniently show up to target the player’s food stocks before winter would hit.

Destruction for the sake of destruction is not clever design.

[Mysterious box]

1 minute ago, cybers2001 said:

I think timed events are fine. Deerclops existing back in vanilla made sense as a chance end-of-winter surprise to screw over a player’s base just in time for the mild season to return so they can rebuild. Even RoG felt cognizant of themed destruction in the way Bearger would conveniently show up to target the player’s food stocks before winter would hit.

Destruction for the sake of destruction is not clever design.

I wouldn't call it destruction for the sake of destruction it's supposed to give the feeling or a ancient horror hunting you down it's primary purpose isn't to wreck your base like deerclops.

[arubaro]

Complaining about having consequences for being afk in a game is peak forum moment 

I dont like uncontrollable destruction but neithet i want it removed by default when there can be works arround like giving more time to flee, making rifts evade structures or filtering which kinf of hound do you want

[00petar00]

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

Well it can be expanded with visual cues and character quotes is that fine?

Sure

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

That's entirely your fault the game nor the devs should be held responsible for you being afk it holds the same weight as getting upset that Charlie kills you when your afk on the surface that's entirely on the player.

I am fine dying for being afk but not losing entire base. Revival is cheap and I have never complained about dying to worm waves when afk.

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

I'm sorry but I can't get behind the idea that the game is at fault for you needing to afk I'm not even sure what to say here leave base when you need afk possibly?

Do you also believe that everyone will do that and that I am really the only player that goes afk? There's no reason to have mobs/bosses that can destroy your base but can be easily avoided but punish you for being afk or for having new players at your base.

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

And that's fair if that's your stance but I don't think it's fair to hold back survival content due to your unique style of playing.

So lets have all the survival content you want to add to the game behind settings so that you can play the way you want as you see this as a solution for builders so lets see how it is when we turn it around?

[cybers2001]

22 minutes ago, arubaro said:

Complaining about having consequences for being afk in a game is peak forum moment 

I’d consider strawmanning to win arguments on the internet is peak forum moment, but I’m not sure what you’d do with all your time without it.

[00petar00]

1 hour ago, abrocator said:

Forced encounters have always been bad game design and bandaid. I’m pretty sure hound waves were introduced back when you could survive off berries in autumn and rabbits in winter.

They are not engaging. They’re just a nuisance and a pest.

Hamlet had the right idea with the Aporkalypse. (Of course it had bat waves, annoyingly.) There’s a threat that you have to proactively work against before it hits. Which forces you into uncomfortable biomes like the deep jungle during uuuuh misty season with all the hatching bugs.

Good design is when you are forced by your own volition into dangerous situations because you have to get something before it’s too late. Or you force yourself into dangerous situations because you are greedy. The better you are at planning ahead the better you are at survival because you can see five steps ahead and very seldom have to be forced into situations that are not favorable to you (to your survival or whatever).

Meanwhile all the waves in this game are just annoying busywork that hangs over you (will it happen three days from now, five…).

This is so accurate, hound waves are a pure chore/annoyance and realistically there's no benefit to killing them.

I wish hound and worm waves were replaced with something like aprokalypse that we only had to interact once a year but it was much more difficult.

[-Nick-]

Obvious solution is to remove all structures from the game. Can't destroy structures if there's none to begin with.

[Mysterious box]

10 minutes ago, 00petar00 said:

Do you also believe that everyone will do that and that I am really the only player that goes afk? There's no reason to have mobs/bosses that can destroy your base but can be easily avoided but punish you for being afk or for having new players at your base.

I mean that's kind of the risk of playing a multiplayer always online survival game.

11 minutes ago, 00petar00 said:

So lets have all the survival content you want to add to the game behind settings so that you can play the way you want as you see this as a solution for builders so lets see how it is when we turn it around?

My solution to boulders was pillars it's why I proposed something similar back then but that unrelated note aside I'd be completely fine with survival content being locked behind settings as I've said in the past I play on pubs and on my own servers with friends I completely wouldn't mind this whether the devs would be willing to do this is another story.

[Mike23Ua]

I just find it funny that people complained about rift earthquakes because those Unavoidable base destruction.

This however… this is a mob, you can kite it away, you can Kill it.. it’s not destruction for the sake of destruction, this is entirely avoidable and it’s on you to avoid it.

Also we should NOT account for “New players” at any point in the games equation, because sure maybe YOU know to flee your base when Deerclops spawns, but that noob huddling near the firepit eating everything in the fridge to stay warm and not die? They’re unaware of the chaos they are about to cause.

[arubaro]

9 minutes ago, cybers2001 said:

I’d consider strawmanning to win arguments on the internet is peak forum moment, but I’m not sure what you’d do with all your time without it.

Working, going out with my gf, watching science youtube videos, reading (currently the 3 body problem, really good book) and playing other games. Something else do you need to know?

Do you find logical to complain about being afk and having consecuences? What a time to be alive

[00petar00]

2 minutes ago, arubaro said:

Do you find logical to complain about being afk and having consecuences? What a time to be alive

Dying is a punishment, losing a whole base results in a rollback and everyone else being punished because you are afk so that makes the player quit every time they go afk and is less likely to continue playing after coming back.

[arubaro]

4 minutes ago, 00petar00 said:

Dying is a punishment, losing a whole base results in a rollback and everyone else being punished because you are afk so that makes the player quit every time they go afk and is less likely to continue playing after coming back.

Nothing wrong with that

 

Edit. In a serious tone. Is your responsibility if you play with others. The game shouldn't be changed arround you being afk. Do they remove wildfires and antlion sinkholes because you dont want to leave a game instead of being afk??? Is a non sense and selfish dumb way of thinking

[gaymime]

9 minutes ago, arubaro said:

Nothing wrong with that

so both you and 00peter00 have been getting really weird and personal about this but dang, this post really is going to get a mod in here locking the thread, come on, my guy. please don't get the thread locked

[cybers2001]

23 minutes ago, arubaro said:

Working, going out with my gf, watching science youtube videos, reading (currently the 3 body problem, really good book) and playing other games. Something else do you need to know?

Do you find logical to complain about being afk and having consecuences? What a time to be alive

Why don’t you go do those things, then, instead of just doubling down on the strawmanning part?

Your gf and all of us will be happier for it.

[NPCMaxwell]

11 minutes ago, gaymime said:

so both you and 00peter00 have been getting really weird and personal about this but dang, this post really is going to get a mod in here locking the thread, come on, my guy. please don't get the thread locked

(replies like those seem to be needed a lot in the forum sadly. I don't know why people have to endanger forum threads by getting into such directions so much I'd say thanks for trying to avoid getting this thread locked.)

[arubaro]

11 minutes ago, cybers2001 said:

Why don’t you go do those things, then, instead of just doubling down on the strawmanning part?

Your gf and all of us will be happier for it.

I dont think you even understand what a strawman fallacy is. You should learn it instead of being worry about how others live

[cybers2001]

1 minute ago, arubaro said:

I dont think you even understand what a strawman fallacy is. You should learn it instead of being worry about how others live

Quote

Strawmanning, also known as a straw man fallacy, is a rhetorical technique that involves distorting or exaggerating an opponent's argument in order to make it easier to defeat

Literally no Megabaser plays the game the way you describe them being entitled to play game. In fact the reality is quite the opposite, but that would be harder to argue against.

[Keknutui]

44 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

Я просто нахожу забавным, что люди жаловались на рифтовые землетрясения, потому что это неизбежное разрушение базы.

Однако это… это толпа, вы можете разогнать ее воздушным змеем, вы можете убить ее .. это не разрушение ради самого разрушения, этого полностью можно избежать, и вы сами должны этого избегать.

Также мы не должны учитывать “Новых игроков” ни на каком этапе игрового процесса, потому что, конечно, может быть, ВЫ знаете, что нужно убегать со своей базы, когда появляется Deerclops, но этот нуб, жмущийся к очагу, ест все, что есть в холодильнике, чтобы согреться и не умереть? Они не подозревают о хаосе, который собираются вызвать.

It will be extremely funny if, when the lunar hail is updated, the damage to the mobs is returned to some extent, from which the megabases will rebel again. I don't know about others, but I find the paranormal subject of rifts interesting. It's our own fault that the moon and the shadow side have taken over the world and we have to deal with them somehow.

It seems to me that such changes are a challenge, as with a new worm.

[arubaro]

5 minutes ago, cybers2001 said:

Literally no Megabaser plays the game the way you describe them being entitled to play game. In fact the reality is quite the opposite, but that would be harder to argue against.

Man, someone complained about one of the reasons why destruction is bad is because you cant go afk. I pointed that is ridiculous and do you think that is a strawman fallacy? And just to start attacking me? You are closer of using strawman fallacies by attacking me instead of arguing properly

This post is about destruction and the new worm. Not the magazine 'Hello!' to talk about others lifes or how to show the little knowledge about philosophy you have

I would ask what way of playing had megabasers i have ever said but i dont want to futher discuss anything without since is worthless and a waste of time