Should every world have the triple Mactusk biome?

[DegenerateFurry]

This is something I've seen near-universal support for over the years, including literally every single person I have mentioned it to in Klei servers without one contrary example, so I'm wondering how the forum will vote. 

[Gashzer]

Eh, tams and walking canes are weak these days. A few characters have some sort of built in speed and beefalos have become so easy to tame for speed. If you are joining a single mactusk pub and care so much for speed just play a character like wx/walter/wormwood/wortox for speed boosts until you eventually get a cane then character swap. So no, single mactusk worlds changes how you prioritize your activities which is good for gameplay repeatability.

That being said, be cool in non-triple mactusk worlds that something else is guaranteed to spawn instead like a tallbird fort.

We need worlds to be different not the same, thats why i dont mind twiggy trees or juicy berry bushes, spices things up abit especially in pubs.

Im a big fan of RNG. And DST needs more of it.

Edited January 21 by Gashzer

[DegenerateFurry]

20 minutes ago, Gashzer said:

Eh, tams and walking canes are weak these days. A few characters have some sort of built in speed and beefalos have become so easy to tame for speed. If you are joining a single mactusk pub and care so much for speed just play a character like wx/walter/wormwood/wortox for speed boosts until you eventually get a cane then character swap. So no, single mactusk worlds changes how you prioritize your activities which is good for gameplay repeatability.

That being said, be cool in non-triple mactusk worlds that something else is guaranteed to spawn instead like a tallbird fort.

We need worlds to be different not the same, thats why i dont mind twiggy trees or juicy berry bushes, spices things up abit especially in pubs.

Im a big fan of RNG. And DST needs more of it.

Except canes aren't the only thing tusks are for? One of Wanda's best items requires them, and anyone who's taming a beefalo will benefit from a brush. Then there's the accursed Ancient Fuelweaver and his ceaseless hunger for Lazy Explorer uses, actively consuming tusks if you're not really careful about leaving one use left. 

[Evelo]

(World Settings, not World Generation) Makes them spawn every day. Idk why it feels like people are allergic to adjusting those settings that are available to everyone.

[DegenerateFurry]

Just now, Evelo said:

(World Settings, not World Generation) Makes them spawn every day. Idk why it feels like people are allergic to adjusting those settings that are available to everyone.

Probably because, back in my day, those just made everything spawn everywhere with no logic or limit. Every biome would be full of anything set to tons. I had no idea that did that.

Also, that doesn't solve it on Klei servers.

[Echsrick]

i mean yea...but...will we remove one of the allways there biomes to make space for it? or do we remove 1 slot for optional biomes? or i guess a optimization update to add it without any biome slots being cut

[DegenerateFurry]

5 minutes ago, Echsrick said:

i mean yea...but...will we remove one of the allways there biomes to make space for it? or do we remove 1 slot for optional biomes? or i guess a optimization update to add it without any biome slots being cut

Second birch can go, nobody loves it. Not even its parents.

[Echsrick]

15 minutes ago, DegenerateFurry said:

Second birch can go, nobody loves it. Not even its parents.

i mean its not even a main biome just a random optional on the list, what i mean is something like replacing 1 of the main biomes or remove 1 optional biome slot for another main biome

alsol yea, second birch is F tier biome

[Gashzer]

4 hours ago, DegenerateFurry said:

Except canes aren't the only thing tusks are for? One of Wanda's best items requires them, and anyone who's taming a beefalo will benefit from a brush. Then there's the accursed Ancient Fuelweaver and his ceaseless hunger for Lazy Explorer uses, actively consuming tusks if you're not really careful about leaving one use left. 

Nah just tank AFW (dont get me started on the whole marble suit is op thing again) plus in pub with other people AFW is easy and wanda can go f herself , If you are making rift watches as wanda on a klei public server then you are an a-hole.

Still you can kill a single mactusk like 4 times during winter? Feel like thats enough for a pub server.

Again if playing on pubs its great to have the fear that a world might only have a single mactusk, makes characters like walter,wortox, woodie(goose), wx and wormwood more valuable to choose. Which is great. 

There is nothing worse than being 5-6 days into a fresh klei pub world and some f-in' a-hole joins and rallies people to regen world for triple mactusk, like calm down lads its not worth it.

[BeeClops]

honestly it should be default for public/dedicated worlds since those are multiplayer most of the time, but for a solo player I feel like I'd simply be a waste of space(as it is in most of my solo worlds), but as it's usually an end biome anyway it's not really an issue. 

but the benefits of having it all the time in multiplayer definitely outweigh the downsides of having it playing solo, so I have to vote yes

[DegenerateFurry]

12 hours ago, Gashzer said:

Nah just tank AFW (dont get me started on the whole marble suit is op thing again) plus in pub with other people AFW is easy and wanda can go f herself , If you are making rift watches as wanda on a klei public server then you are an a-hole.

Still you can kill a single mactusk like 4 times during winter? Feel like thats enough for a pub server.

Again if playing on pubs its great to have the fear that a world might only have a single mactusk, makes characters like walter,wortox, woodie(goose), wx and wormwood more valuable to choose. Which is great. 

There is nothing worse than being 5-6 days into a fresh klei pub world and some f-in' a-hole joins and rallies people to regen world for triple mactusk, like calm down lads its not worth it.

Nah, it's worth it. Everyone being able to move 25% faster is nice, I will always vote yes to regen for triple tusk unless the world is otherwise phenomenally unusual (like lunar touching the mainland in a useful area). In solo, I use a mod that guarantees it. 

RNG is the devil.

[Mysterious box]

No offense on either but much like the call for a tamo nerf this just feels unnecessary min maxing can be fun but part of the fun of dst is supposed to be that the world doesn't just generate in your favor you are supposed to make due with what you have or use the settings to alter it.

[Cheggf]

They should do the opposite and increase the variety of Mactusks. Right now there's only one single piece of randomness to it: does the Triple Tusk biome generate? Every world has exactly 1 camp next to the moonstone, and 50% of worlds have three camps right next to each-other in the triple tusk biome. That's it.

It would be much more interesting if instead of 50% of worlds having 4x as many tusks, the amount of tusks was less varied, but the way you get them more varied. On a Klei server if everybody hasn't left by Winter it is really obnoxious to try to spread out a single camp's rewards among 5 or 10 people. It should be something like ⅓ of worlds have the Triple Tusk biome, ⅓ of worlds have that really dangerous Mactusk setpiece from DSA, and ⅓ of worlds have 2-4 Mactusk camps strewn around in random locations. 

[DegenerateFurry]

This many people voting against such an obviously good thing makes me really glad Klei doesn't listen to feedback on the forums much anymore. There's no way you all actually play this game, let alone with other people/in public servers, and don't think more tusks would be good.

1 hour ago, Cheggf said:

They should do the opposite and increase the variety of Mactusks. Right now there's only one single piece of randomness to it: does the Triple Tusk biome generate? Every world has exactly 1 camp next to the moonstone, and 50% of worlds have three camps right next to each-other in the triple tusk biome. That's it.

It would be much more interesting if instead of 50% of worlds having 4x as many tusks, the amount of tusks was less varied, but the way you get them more varied. On a Klei server if everybody hasn't left by Winter it is really obnoxious to try to spread out a single camp's rewards among 5 or 10 people. It should be something like ⅓ of worlds have the Triple Tusk biome, ⅓ of worlds have that really dangerous Mactusk setpiece from DSA, and ⅓ of worlds have 2-4 Mactusk camps strewn around in random locations. 

Honestly, this is the only legitimate argument in this thread against adding triple tusk because you're still addressing the problem here (not enough tusks to go around on a populated server/with a Wanda). More tusks is more tusks and that's what we need, and you're right, your way is more interesting.

Edited January 22 by DegenerateFurry

[wormwood123]

Honestly I don’t really like the set pieces that introduce a lot of unmovable things to my world. My biggest gripe is moose goose nests specifically the triple or quad nest set piece. Moose goose and mactusk are two of my most hated creatures in the game because of how they spawn (mactusk is no where near as bad as moose goose) if they added a way to relocate mactusk then I wouldn’t mind but I also feel that isn’t a good idea as people could then move mactusk to base and farm him like a volt goat.

[Mysterious box]

12 hours ago, DegenerateFurry said:

This many people voting against such an obviously good thing makes me really glad Klei doesn't listen to feedback on the forums much anymore. There's no way you all actually play this game, let alone with other people/in public servers, and don't think more tusks would be good.

Honestly, this is the only legitimate argument in this thread against adding triple tusk because you're still addressing the problem here (not enough tusks to go around on a populated server/with a Wanda). More tusks is more tusks and that's what we need, and you're right, your way is more interesting.

Making a completed pseudo station on the surface with every world generation would also be a obvious good thing for people who don't really want to bother with the ruins specifically doesn't mean it would be a good idea for the game.

[Well-met]

12 hours ago, DegenerateFurry said:

This many people voting against such an obviously good thing makes me really glad Klei doesn't listen to feedback on the forums much anymore. There's no way you all actually play this game, let alone with other people/in public servers, and don't think more tusks would be good.

Honestly, this is the only legitimate argument in this thread against adding triple tusk because you're still addressing the problem here (not enough tusks to go around on a populated server/with a Wanda). More tusks is more tusks and that's what we need, and you're right, your way is more interesting.

Worldgen RNG is vital to keeping this game interesting.

there is no faster way to killing a game than having everything handed out the same way each playthrough.

[DegenerateFurry]

3 minutes ago, Well-met said:

Worldgen RNG is vital to keeping this game interesting.

there is no faster way to killing a game than having everything handed out the same way each playthrough.

 Hollow Knight, a singleplayer game which released in 2017 and does not receive continuous major content updates like DST does, has nearly as many people playing it right now as Don't Starve Together does. 10K vs 12K. Hollow Knight: Silksong, which is more recent but is also a singleplayer game, has a thousand more players in-game than DST does right now. Some DST players are idling for drops, but there's no reason for anyone to idle in a Hollow Knight game because it doesn't do that. Consider yourself objectively disproven.

Both of these games have essentially no RNG in them. The difference in playthroughs comes in what order you do different parts of the game in and in what equipment you choose to use. DST also has that going on, but it has a bunch of RNG stuff too without any real benefit from it.

If you want to gamble, go play Clover Pit.

Edited January 22 by DegenerateFurry

[landromat]

10 minutes ago, DegenerateFurry said:

 Hollow Knight, a singleplayer game which released in 2017 and does not receive continuous major content updates like DST does, has nearly as many people playing it right now as Don't Starve Together does. 10K vs 12K. Hollow Knight: Silksong, which is more recent but is also a singleplayer game, has a thousand more players in-game than DST does right now. Some DST players are idling for drops, but there's no reason for anyone to idle in a Hollow Knight game because it doesn't do that. Consider yourself objectively disproven.

Both of these games have essentially no RNG in them. The difference in playthroughs comes in what order you do different parts of the game in and in what equipment you choose to use. DST also has that going on, but it has a bunch of RNG stuff too without any real benefit from it.

If you want to gamble, go play Clover Pit.

use world seeds then? same world with 3 tusks for ya forever

[DegenerateFurry]

2 minutes ago, landromat said:

use world seeds then? same world with 3 tusks for ya forever

Not a vanilla feature, won't be consistent with worldgen mods, and I can't do that on a Klei server. In singleplayer, I use a mod that makes triple mactusk guaranteed. This thread is not about modding. It's about a commonly-requested change to the game that'd make it a better multiplayer experience, and I was also curious to see how much the forum differs from people who I've actually seen playing DST.

Edited January 22 by DegenerateFurry

[AuRuS]

2 hours ago, DegenerateFurry said:

 Hollow Knight, a singleplayer game which released in 2017 and does not receive continuous major content updates like DST does, has nearly as many people playing it right now as Don't Starve Together does. 10K vs 12K. Hollow Knight: Silksong, which is more recent but is also a singleplayer game, has a thousand more players in-game than DST does right now. Some DST players are idling for drops, but there's no reason for anyone to idle in a Hollow Knight game because it doesn't do that. Consider yourself objectively disproven.

I cringed so hard my toes nearly tore the floor panels apart when I read that last sentence hoooooooooly 

 

There is no way you're actually bringing up a success of HK as an argument that we should have a damn triple mctusk setpiece guaranteed.

(Don't let this guy hear about CS2 and it's playerbase playing the same few maps over and over again with no RNG in their generation either!! People that like to play differently generated worlds would never see the light of day again!)

[gaymime]

3 hours ago, DegenerateFurry said:

Both of these games have essentially no RNG in them.

....hk is not a multiplayer sandbox survival game; it is a semi-linear single-player platformer. you are complaining that chocolate cake is more popular than lasagna and that lasagna just needs to be more like chocolate cake and that is why you should be allowed to change out the ricotta for créme fraiche. the two things being compared are not comparable in the way you are trying to compare them which makes your point feel nonsensical.

[BrixGoBrrr]

the rift watch is for groups. the backtrek is for Wanda-only teleportation,

limiting such a powerful group boost til over 2.5 hours of gameplay into a new world is already so so deeply silly, it's hard to take arguments seriously that are providing endless reasons why it's fine as it is.. limiting the newer characters bc it preserves DSA nostalgia, is not fun.. 

both MacTusk and Wee MacTusk clearly each have 2 tusks anyway, so increasing the tusk drop rate makes sense to me,
something like 1 guaranteed from MacTusk plus 50% for a second, 
plus 50% for each of Wee MacTusks's 2 tusks 
(i'm assuming boosting the MacTusks drops would be simpler & faster than changing world gen norms)

.. truly though, Wanda's group teleport ability shouldn't have to wait til Winter anyway, getting a Wanda-main friend set up enough to benefit the group really shouldn't be so tedious,
give us a way to make an igloo, and spawn a MacTusk after using a flare, maybe? 
or trade the Frostjaw for tusks? 
maybe the Wandering Trader? 

[DegenerateFurry]

5 hours ago, AuRuS said:

There is no way you're actually bringing up a success of HK as an argument that we should have a damn triple mctusk setpiece guaranteed.

(Don't let this guy hear about CS2 and it's playerbase playing the same few maps over and over again with no RNG in their generation either!! People that like to play differently generated worlds would never see the light of day again!)

I think you're missing the point? I brought up Hollow Knight and Silksong to show that games can be replayable without RNG. Well-Met said, "Worldgen RNG is vital to keeping this game interesting. there is no faster way to killing a game than having everything handed out the same way each playthrough." His argument is that removing the possibility of getting a disappointing single walrus hut in the world will kill DST.

These are solid counter-examples. He stated that not specifically of sandbox games, but of games. I have proven otherwise, plenty of RNG-light games are very replayable through the same aspects as DST. Work on your reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.

Additionally, if we look at Terraria - a game that does have a randomly-generated world - its literal most popular mod of all time is one that adds a bunch of crafting recipes for things you'd normally have to find randomly in the world or fish for (and, even in vanilla, fishing gives you a grindy-but-guaranteed way of getting them). I shouldn't have to say anything about Terraria's replayability.

To spell it out simply: we can decrease the amount of problems caused by RNG without removing it entirely. 

  

22 hours ago, Cheggf said:

They should do the opposite and increase the variety of Mactusks. Right now there's only one single piece of randomness to it: does the Triple Tusk biome generate? Every world has exactly 1 camp next to the moonstone, and 50% of worlds have three camps right next to each-other in the triple tusk biome. That's it.

It would be much more interesting if instead of 50% of worlds having 4x as many tusks, the amount of tusks was less varied, but the way you get them more varied. On a Klei server if everybody hasn't left by Winter it is really obnoxious to try to spread out a single camp's rewards among 5 or 10 people. It should be something like ⅓ of worlds have the Triple Tusk biome, ⅓ of worlds have that really dangerous Mactusk setpiece from DSA, and ⅓ of worlds have 2-4 Mactusk camps strewn around in random locations. 

Cheggf's suggestion here is a really good one for that specific thing. It adds variety to playthroughs, but still addresses the "we have six players and are mathematically unlikely to get enough walking canes for all of them in a single winter" problem the current system of one-camp worlds existing does. 

Edited January 23 by DegenerateFurry

[Cheggf]

Frankly I'm surprised Klei has had this go the way it is for so long. They made it so you can get infinite Deerclops, you literally spawn him as much as you want on command by using an item like it's Terraria, but they did nothing to address the 10,000x more important Mactusk camps? The eyebrella is not unique at all in its functionality of protecting you from either rain or heat, but the walking cane basically is. The closest there is to another walking cane is the thulecite club which is 2.5x worse, or a lazy explorer which is technically obtainable but wholly impractical, especially for trying to outfit 5+ players.