How to Rebalance Don't Starve for Multiplayer? Console Commands Yes/No? page 16

[J20hawkz]

To next day =D.

I made a mistake when writing :s

No problem mate. I thought that's what you meant originally but I wanted to make sure.

[Kimah]

when you create the room you shoulda get to chose if you want ppl to get custom characters or not, cause most of them are unbalaced or that its what i think. i dont know if this have been talked already.

[J20hawkz]

when you create the room you shoulda get to chose if you want ppl to get custom characters or not, cause most of them are unbalaced or that its what i think. i dont know if this have been talked already.

That's a very good question. I also want to throw in all player made mods into the mix. In my opinion Don't Starve Together shouldn't allow mods. It will be pointless playing with a party of heavy modded players. Not to mention how would some mods work which affect certain gameplay/items in game for everyone if that person has the mods activated. Maybe some, that doesn't give party members an edge over someone without mods, like being able to see health, hunger, sanity as numbers.

To save the developers the headache of allowing mods in Don't Starve Together, it shouldn't happen.

Thoughts?

[Ridley]

To save the developers the headache of allowing mods in Don't Starve Together, it shouldn't happen.

Thoughts?

 

It shouldn't happen as a priority. Once most of the implementation and testing is done, I would like the ability to play with mods.

[J20hawkz]

It shouldn't happen as a priority. Once most of the implementation and testing is done, I would like the ability to play with mods.

Why though?

Most of the mods give players a definite edge while playing. Would you be happy to have other players using mods in your team? Mods like "take your time", "godly fire", "auto planting" and ones that combine a bunch of cheat mods into one package like "too cool to die"

[jbeetle]

Why though?

Most of the mods give players a definite edge while playing. Would you be happy to have other players using mods in your team? Mods like "take your time", "godly fire", "auto planting" and ones that combine a bunch of cheat mods into one package like "too cool to die"

rather than never having mods? yes. I don't predict that the majority will continue to look for complete strangers to play with.

 

Not to mention, the capability of modders will probably increase with multiplayer.

[J20hawkz]

rather than never having mods? yes. I don't predict that the majority will continue to look for complete strangers to play with.

 

Not to mention, the capability of modders will probably increase with multiplayer.

I thought that too. I guess one way of making sure you don't get lobbied with a modder, is to have a separate server for people who don't mind having party members using mods. I've never been a big fan of mods if I'm honest, and I'd very much prefer to play with randoms on the same level, with no one having an edge over another. Either that or I'll stick to private lobbies 24/7.

[jbeetle]

 Either that or I'll stick to private lobbies 24/7.

That's what I'll probably do anyway, to be honest. but who knows, I might surprise myself and dive into the sea of people that don't know what they're doing, afkers, trolls, and other wonderful people.

[Ridley]

That's what I'll probably do anyway, to be honest. but who knows, I might surprise myself and dive into the sea of people that don't know what they're doing, afkers, trolls, and other wonderful people.

 

I'll be that guy filling the base with balloons.

 

You shall never find your chester in the balloon pit 

[randompandora]

Funny how grief isn't even a concern to me because I don't think like a jerk, I feel like the people suggesting such things/solutions are those that will be causing problems.  

Anyway the idea of playing with someone who is going to intentionally violate the stated-in-the-name objective just seems silly to say it nice.   I'm sure it will happen but you make all your own decisions, so don't play with them and they can't play with you.  

 

The idea of adding a severe consequence for those that would violate this understanding that goes along with challenging survival seems apt to me.   Maybe they automatically lose all their sanity  when they kill a player and that player gets to spawn a ghost that can continuously pursue and attack them making their survival nearly impossible for being a murderer.  (allowing the murdered player the satisfaction of revenge and also keeps them playing.)

 

Although I must address that if PVP is added in anyway whatsoever something needs to be done about the targeting system, which at this time is still unreliable to say the least, even being able to attack your own chester seems pointless and unwieldy, add a player that will take personal offense and start a game shattering war over a simple targeting error seems like  a stupid prospect.   Gee wish I didn't want that life restoring butter/flywing when they moved into range.  

 

As for restoring dead players, there could possibly be added an item lootable from the skeleton of the deceased that could be used in a recipe to respawn them,  perhaps a stack of meat and a Life restoring amulet, add the players item and viola.    Touchstones could possibly be shattered down to their pre-touched stage in order for a different player to be the most recent toucher,  possibly indicating or not to the previous player adding that extra element of false security.  

 

 

Chester is Chester, notice the proper name, hence there is only one, end of discussion. 

 

Hmmm, I don't quite seem to know how to use this.  Seem pretty straight forward?  Add a little personal spin for each character, and that solves your player specific item issue.  (I feel like this is more for the other forumers and not Klei)

 

Scaling or any other term to describe the effect is not optimal in my opinion most of the world has plenty of resources to go around, the limit is more imposed by the risk vs.  reward,and time management. Adding more hunters and gathers to the tribe means you can bring in more from more places not that the limited supply that you were able to collect alone now has to support three more people who aren't doing anything for themselves.  While one person can focus on construction resources another could build farms (a nearly endless food resource when managed prudently), while another focuses on meats and wild veggies/mushrooms.  

[polygone]

I hate it when I don't have enough grass and twigs and looove it when I have. 40 Drying Racks filled with ease for later Cave Expedition in one day, hell yeah. 

 

And making spiders stronger instead of more in quantity will make silk rare, when more players join one world. So let there be swarms (since when there are many of them, they can stunlock you as well as you can them). And if this will be worse for sanity - split the pack, lead them in different directions, cooperate. That'll be more fun.

That's kind of my point. You have to remember not everyone in Don't Starve Together will be playing as a team, some will go off solo and become a hermit that attacks people and loots bases. If this lone person happens to be camped near a spider den at night, and a spider gets close enough he has to kill it or run into the darkness to avoid it that will attract twenty spiders from all over the place, and he'll be stunlocked with no chance of fighting back. At least with a few stronger spiders he can stunlock them and use traps to catch them without needing an ungodly amount of grass.

 

There needs to be a balance with Shadows. If resistant to heat/cold, they need to have something that makes using them not suitable for long. People will die on purpose and just abuse it.

I was thinking as a Shadow you have no health, hunger and and your sanity is set permanently at a point where hallucinations are visible but do not attack you, or set it lower so hallucinations do attack. Remember we are already allowing second chances in a game that punished us for dying.

All monsters in game are aggressive towards you. Other players can see you. But I was thinking as a shadow you have the ability to instantly teleport to any part of the map, to avoid confrontation with anyone against you. Also you have maybe 10 days to revive yourself, after which time you are permadead.

Just some random ideas. Haven't thought about them too much.

I liked the idea someone put earlier about people turning into invisible spirits when they died, and this let them run away from whatever killed them and they'll turn into a shadow the following day. This would let people get far enough from danger to be able to start over or get to their base. The shadow should have health and hunger, if they didn't I'd really want to stay a shadow in order to be able to survive winter/summer without even food. Just stand in a corner and do nothing. Just make the shadow's stats really low like Wes or possibly lower, and people will want to play as their main character again. Maybe Klei can be evil and make it so when you're a shadow you're not allowed to talk to anyone. That'd make people want to revive, and it'd be a lot more hectic running back to your base trying to revive yourself since you can't let your team know what you're doing after you die/what killed you.

 

Mm. Teleport seems to be OP. I suggest we make this shadow fellas invisible not only until dawn, but also to every sane person after dawn. So if you wanna hunt someone down completely - you maintain insane state searching the map, fighting not only shadow players but insanity mobs as well, that'll make killing some off much harder. About shadows benig time limited - as I said - make them starve much faster and the problem is solved... Ridding them of health and hunger completely, while making them just time limited - i don't think that'll be fun... 

Look what I responded one quote up. xP

Don't really like the time limit though, that seems kinda lame since it could take a long time to make a nightmare amulet and meat effigies are mainly feasable for Wilson, but since you're a shadow you'd need to kill the rabbits while insane and hope for beard hair. And touch stones will eventually all be used be people exploring. Making people starve faster does sound like a better solution though, since that's a more passive approach to limiting time than just having people die after like ten days.

when you create the room you shoulda get to chose if you want ppl to get custom characters or not, cause most of them are unbalaced or that its what i think. i dont know if this have been talked already.

Speaking with how Minecraft mods work, it's up to the server owner which mods to allow, or whether or not to allow mods at all. Plus mods will have to be redone to work with the server client, so it's also up to which modmakers update their stuff as to what mods can be used. Personally I like the custom characters, since while there are plenty of OP ones there are also some really cool ones that are at least somewhat balanced/fun to explore the perks of. Like the Puppy Princess character I play as has basically a whole section of new crafting recipes along with a new pet and level up system, but her stats are fairly generic and she's hungrier during the day, as well as hating spoiled food so she gains a sanity debuff from that. I've actually had a harder time playing as her than some of the default characters just because I'm trying to focus on crafting some of the mod gear rather than just surviving.

 

That's a very good question. I also want to throw in all player made mods into the mix. In my opinion Don't Starve Together shouldn't allow mods. It will be pointless playing with a party of heavy modded players. Not to mention how would some mods work which affect certain gameplay/items in game for everyone if that person has the mods activated. Maybe some, that doesn't give party members an edge over someone without mods, like being able to see health, hunger, sanity as numbers.

To save the developers the headache of allowing mods in Don't Starve Together, it shouldn't happen.

Thoughts?

Allowing mods would be a good thing, since people like playing with mods in singleplayer so in multiplayer it wouldn't be any different. That said, there are a lot of mods that just plain do OP things, and even in the description of the mod some say they are OP. That said, server owners should get to choose what mods to enable/disable. Don't have the right mods, you can't play on the server. It'd actually be cool to have a heavily modded server with your friends where you just run around kicking wierd mod creature's butts and pulling all sorts of shenanagans. But if someone wants to play on a server without mods/being interrupted by someone who has mods, then they should be able to do that as well. :3

[Madman666]

That's kind of my point. You have to remember not everyone in Don't Starve Together will be playing as a team, some will go off solo and become a hermit that attacks people and loots bases. If this lone person happens to be camped near a spider den at night, and a spider gets close enough he has to kill it or run into the darkness to avoid it that will attract twenty spiders from all over the place, and he'll be stunlocked with no chance of fighting back. At least with a few stronger spiders he can stunlock them and use traps to catch them without needing an ungodly amount of grass.

 

You have a point, but I still don't like the idea of empowering mobs. I mean yeah, you can stunlock 1-2, buf 1-2 more - you're screwed because they are now stronger and tougher (while if they are quite weak, but there are many of them - you can kite the pack, not allowing them to surround you). Not to mention that this one will raise another problem - if they are just stronger not larger in quantity - player teams will be able deal with them even more easily, constantly stunlocking whole Dens of spiders. And there will be silk shortage too... Its only my opinion, but I really wouldn't do that.

 

And attracting 20 spiders is possible even in singleplayer, just by stupidly camping near several Spider Dens and hitting one of them, when they come by to say hello. This is a question of caution - be vigilant and think forward - where are you going to stop for the night and how can you move in case of compromising your camping spot - like having a torch or two or making a miner hat. And those ungodly amounts of grass can be rather easily aquired by visiting savanna biome or having grass farm of 30-40 grass tufts and harvesting them regularly. Its not like all 20 spiders will pounce you suddenly, when you just stepped on webbing. They still should emerge 3-4 in numbers to check what going on. And that allows you to capture all 20 with just 4 traps, just alerting them 5 times. I think thats pretty doable even if you are alone. In fact you'll have more monster meat and silk all for yourself, while you are playing alone. The trade off of course is that dealing with spider queen will be a lot tougher alone and you'll have act more careful around high tier Dens, not to accidentally hit them or any spiders near them.

 

Look what I responded one quote up. xP

Don't really like the time limit though, that seems kinda lame since it could take a long time to make a nightmare amulet and meat effigies are mainly feasable for Wilson, but since you're a shadow you'd need to kill the rabbits while insane and hope for beard hair. And touch stones will eventually all be used be people exploring. Making people starve faster does sound like a better solution though, since that's a more passive approach to limiting time than just having people die after like ten days.

 

That my post was precisely against timelimit and no hunger\health for shadows. And yep, increased hunger rate is not a bad solution i think. But you've gotta admit - hunting for shadows while being completely insane (because if you are sane - you won't see shadows at all) will make a fun and dangerous experience, no? So if you want to hunt someone down completely - you'll have try harder and defend yourself against sanity monsters. A little extra twist

 

P.S. That was actually me, proposing shadows to be invisible until dawn. But that must be adjusted too - if someone is killed about 1-2 hours before dawn - they will not have a chance to run very far... Being able to see shadows only in insane state will somewhat help with that. Or maybe just stick with boring fixed "invisible time" for 5-6 game hours... Something like that.

 

That's a very good question. I also want to throw in all player made mods into the mix. In my opinion Don't Starve Together shouldn't allow mods. It will be pointless playing with a party of heavy modded players. Not to mention how would some mods work which affect certain gameplay/items in game for everyone if that person has the mods activated. Maybe some, that doesn't give party members an edge over someone without mods, like being able to see health, hunger, sanity as numbers.

To save the developers the headache of allowing mods in Don't Starve Together, it shouldn't happen.

Thoughts?

 

As a modder, I don't really like the idea of completely shutting off every mod... cheat ones - yes definitely, but there are mods, that while making the game somewhat more convenient - still do not give a gameruining advantage. Perhaps make it so that game host defines which mods there will be or if there will be no mods at all and the mod content temporarily downloaded to game files of those who joins? This way everyone will have mod content available - so no advantages over other players at all.

[Natori]

It would be more funny to see other players trying to fight the air when their sanity is low

[polygone]

 

You have a point, but I still don't like the idea of empowering mobs. I mean yeah, you can stunlock 1-2, buf 1-2 more - you're screwed because they are now stronger and tougher (while if they are quite weak, but there are many of them - you can kite the pack, not allowing them to surround you). Not to mention that this one will raise another problem - if they are just stronger not larger in quantity - player teams will be able deal with them even more easily, constantly stunlocking whole Dens of spiders. And there will be silk shortage too... Its only my opinion, but I really wouldn't do that.

 

And attracting 20 spiders is possible even in singleplayer, just by stupidly camping near several Spider Dens and hitting one of them, when they come by to say hello. This is a question of caution - be vigilant and think forward - where are you going to stop for the night and how can you move in case of compromising your camping spot - like having a torch or two or making a miner hat. And those ungodly amounts of grass can be rather easily aquired by visiting savanna biome or having grass farm of 30-40 grass tufts and harvesting them regularly. Its not like all 20 spiders will pounce you suddenly, when you just stepped on webbing. They still should emerge 3-4 in numbers to check what going on. And that allows you to capture all 20 with just 4 traps, just alerting them 5 times. I think thats pretty doable even if you are alone. In fact you'll have more monster meat and silk all for yourself, while you are playing alone. The trade off of course is that dealing with spider queen will be a lot tougher alone and you'll have act more careful around high tier Dens, not to accidentally hit them or any spiders near them.

 

 

That my post was precisely against timelimit and no hunger\health for shadows. And yep, increased hunger rate is not a bad solution i think. But you've gotta admit - hunting for shadows while being completely insane (because if you are sane - you won't see shadows at all) will make a fun and dangerous experience, no? So if you want to hunt someone down completely - you'll have try harder and defend yourself against sanity monsters. A little extra twist

 

P.S. That was actually me, proposing shadows to be invisible until dawn. But that must be adjusted too - if someone is killed about 1-2 hours before dawn - they will not have a chance to run very far... Being able to see shadows only in insane state will somewhat help with that. Or maybe just stick with boring fixed "invisible time" for 5-6 game hours... Something like that.

 

 

As a modder, I don't really like the idea of completely shutting off every mod... cheat ones - yes definitely, but there are mods, that while making the game somewhat more convenient - still do not give a gameruining advantage. Perhaps make it so that game host defines which mods there will be or if there will be no mods at all and the mod content temporarily downloaded to game files of those who joins? This way everyone will have mod content available - so no advantages over other players at all.

Oh, having just a few come out at a time from the dens would be fine-ish for spiders then, and of course there's always if multiple dens are around you could get overwhelmed anyways, but my problem is I don't want to be overrun with spiders by having just one den. And if you're at night and are restricted to a campfire, then you can't really kite twenty spiders coming in from all sides. You could probably just set it up so a large portion of the spiders just stay in the nest even at night, and make a hard limit on how many can be out at once. But if someone hits the web while some are inside, more will come out to defend. That way you wouldn't have to buff spider's health or anything, and you could still have a ton of spiders without the overcrowding. And anyways I don't see there being a 'silk shortage', since I've gotten more than enough string for the better part of fifty or so days just from a couple days of silk farming. It really doesn't take much to make anything, and killing a spider queen/trapping a tier 3 den gives tons of silk. If you really want more you could just plant more spider nests by hunting spider queens, so your argument about a silk shortage isn't really that much of a big deal. Only problem is if someone kills the tier 1-2 dens and extincts spiders, which is a distinct possibility.

[Ridley]

Funny how grief isn't even a concern to me because I don't think like a jerk, I feel like the people suggesting such things/solutions are those that will be causing problems.  

 

Anyway the idea of playing with someone who is going to intentionally violate the stated-in-the-name objective just seems silly to say it nice.   I'm sure it will happen but you make all your own decisions, so don't play with them and they can't play with you.  

 

The idea of adding a severe consequence for those that would violate this understanding that goes along with challenging survival seems apt to me. 

 

All developers think like jerks then, because they need to think of how to prevent players from hurting other players if the goal it to make a non-friendly fire game. The people fore-warning this may or may not cause problems, but its still not nice to try to sterotype.

 

The only thing that gets me here is public servers. If I try to join a random server and people wait until I do alot of work to later kill me, I don't think leaving is going to discourage them from doing it to someone else. Its not going to boost my enjoyment of the game either.

 

If we can't disable friendly fire altogether, then this would be my second preference.

[jbeetle]

All developers think like jerks then, because they need to think of how to prevent players from hurting other players

I only agree to an extent. If they go overboard with what they allow/disallow, it'll be sooooo boring.

[PurplePricklyPorcupine]

Dont Starve Together Ideas

 

1) There should not e a PVP for dont starve,  this is a me against the world situation and I dont think this will add to the game. 

2) No friendly fire or team killing, things in dont starve kill people easily enough anyway. 

3) In multi I do think that monsters should be harder to kill, maybe make them bigger to emphasize this fact. 

4) There should be a larger map/biome it would make it harder for the players to split up, (perhaps put it a walkitalkie system that allows you to see other players on the map (this will have to be made).

5) Aggro should e the person who is the weakest in the team in terms of health. 

6) Yes you can share loot....(put in a trading system perhaps?)

7) Yes Vargs should spawns with hound attacks, along with the tracks.

8) No the world customization should be fine, what I m more concerned with is the mods and letting everyone share that. 

9) I think you should be able to see your friends hallucinations but you cannot fight them and they cannot hurt you however in terms of sanity because you have other people with you the sanity does not go down as fast. 

10) Sleeping in tents should in stead of sleeping just be a structure that helps restore sanity while under it instead of actually sleeping in it. This is another way of making the game harder, things can still get you in the night. 

11) Each player can get their own chester, and if wished by all player should be able to be combined into a big chester who is stationary but can protect the camp and possibly spawn little chesters when an appropriate....sacrifice is made. Also make chester harder to find.

12) I think we should be able to store loot in each others chester. 

13) I support the licking attack. In terms of tanking, I think that one should be able to tank while the other ones have a survival instinct and start running away from monsters. The tanking will apply to the closest chester. In terms of health I think the current way chester is maintained is fine. 

14) I think for players who have died, their friends need to find a way to revive them, but in the mean time hey should be ghosts that can only follow people around perhaps have some skills like abigail? In order to balance this out you can have the ghost player eat at the sanity of their fellow multiplayers. Or maybe a good idea would be to make it so that the player has a designated grave....OH! Something to add at night! Zombies and Ghosts spawn when the moon is out!!!!!!

15) I think that we should be able to keep track of our fellow players. 

 

16) You should make the seasons more varied, like winter is longer, summer is shorter, spring is shorter too.

17) Introduce diseases, like with the beefalo, and the pig people...like rabies. (this comes in the form of raiding camps in terms of the pigs). For the beefalo this can produce diseased meat. Players should be able to be afflicted with certain diseases too. Of course you complete this with medicine, which should be attained by making a medicine machine. 

18) Oh! For multiplayers with camps in close proximity to each other, the hounds should spawn more, and you should probably create more animals that proactively attack the players at random. 

19) The items that people create should be able to eventually break down like the ice box and the chests. 

 

Thats all for my suggestions for now I hope you will like them!!!!!

 

[J20hawkz]

Ok sleeping in Minecraft multiplayer, like @Flare2V mentioned works by having everyone activating sleep to cause time to pass. So if one person wanted to sleep he would have to wait for everyone else to sleep for it to work, thus skipping time till next morning.

In Don't Starve the main purpose of sleeping is to restore sanity. The days are short and go by fast so I doubt most of us sleep to skip a chunk of time just to start a new day, every second counts especially early game. Personally I have never used a tent or a straw roll etc...If my sanity was normal/high. To me that seemed like a waste of resources over using a log or two to burn over night.

So who doesn't mind waiting then? The max time you will need to wait if you alone chose to sleep with no other team factors, is 150 secs. The minimum time of waiting is 30 secs.

So you have a waiting time between 30 - 150 seconds. Is that too long of a waiting time? Personally for me.....no not really.

To help pass that time we can have the option to spectate other players. So the camera switches to another player while you sleep.

This is only an option. Thoughts?

[Fungi]

Should there be PVP?

I like the bind key pvp option

 

Should there be friendly fire/team killing?

If someone is holding the bind key, sure.

 

Should monsters be harder to kill?

Yep. The monsters should be stronger, or the players should be weaker.

Should there be larger maps, bigger biomes?

We can already do that while setting up our world, but sure.

 

How will we gain aggro on monsters now that there are two or more of us in the same game?

Just like we did I guess. Monsters should aggro the first player they see, and change target if someone else  attacks them first or if the targeted player goes too far away.

 

Can we share loot?

Sure, by dropping stuff into the ground. Automatically splitting loot would be a nuisance with our limited inventories.

 

Will Vargs now spawn in hound attacks (had to throw this in sorry)?

Why not.

How will sanity work? Will we be able to see our friends hallucinations even though we aren't going insane?

Not if the other player(s) are sane. If 2 or more people are insane, however, they should be able to fight hallucinations together.

 

How will sleeping in tents work? If I go to sleep will the day skip for all of us?

I think everyone should be in a tent for the day to skip.

 

Will each player now get their own Chester?
Nah. Too OP. Keep Chester as it is, but one is enough.

How will death work? If one player dies does the game end?

I like the shadow player idea that was exposed. The shadow should be extremely weak, have a limited inventory, and drain the sanity of surrounding players, to encourage it to revive instead of  just staying as a shadow.

The surviving player(s) should be able to craft some kind of magic tier item to bring back their friend too.

What do you think about player health/hunger/sanity bars? If we can see how high or low our friends health is we can share resources effectively without having to waste resources on someone who doesn't need it. Can you really trust someone desperate to survive?

We shouldnt be able to see other people's bars. The HUD would be a mess, you can always ask.

 

--------------------------------

I think it would be great to have different modes for multiplayer:

 

-A regular, free-for-all with a random queue public mode, where players choose to work together or slaughter each other. I think players should not be able to chat freely with each other in this mode, relying instead on basic (and therefore ambiguous) hand gestures like the ones displayed by Wes (maybe a little less ambiguous) or the sounds each character makes to interact. We could have a "friendly" gesture/sound, an"aggresive" gesture/sound, a "follow me" gesture/sound, etc.

Players should be anonymous in this mode, to ensure that no personal vendettas or bullying of weaker players happen afterwards in the community, with the option to reveal your identity to a determined player should you wish to play with them again in the future.

 

-There should be a way to make a private co-op game too, that way everyone can play as they want if strangers are too much to handle. You could also invite people you met in the free-for-all mode and be able to chat normally while in the co-op game.

There could be some sort of GPS item that the players would voluntarily carry to show themselves in each other's map.

 

-If its not too much trouble, I would love to see a "pig faction vs merm faction" mode that integrates the co-op playstyle with your fellow faction members with the pvp playstile against members of the opposing faction. We should be able to chat with the people on our faction, but there would be no communication with the rival faction members (who would talk to a merm lover anyway?).

Players that willingly join this mode woudln't have to worry about being betrayed (no switching teams) and wouldnt whine about being killed, since killing the antagonistic faction is pretty much the point of this particular mode.

[Ridley]

This is only an option. Thoughts?

 

Who is going to want to use sleep items if they are boring? Sitting there for 2 minutes might not be a big deal, but its a extra load when sleeping items are not the most used item anyway.

 

And what about using the siesta thing during the long summer day?

[J20hawkz]

Who is going to want to use sleep items if they are boring? Sitting there for 2 minutes might not be a big deal, but its a extra load when sleeping items are not the most used item anyway.

And what about using the siesta thing during the long summer day?

Yeah but an upside to that is while you wait for 2 or so minutes, you can spectate another player. See what they are doing etc...

I would even like to be able to communicate with other players in the team. It doesn't need to make sense how that is possible. So all I need to do is most likely hit Enter, and type away.

Edit: it's not like we are going to sleep every day in game. I probably use my tent every 20-40 days. Not sure what it is exactly but I hardly use It.

When all players decide to sleep it works like Minecraft, the day skips to the next.

[randompandora]

Edit: it's not like we are going to sleep every day in game. I probably use my tent every 20-40 days. Not sure what it is exactly but I hardly use It.

When all players decide to sleep it works like Minecraft, the day skips to the next.

You are ignoring the relevant content of the post you quoted.  Alot of your reasoning seems to make sense if we ignore summer and that the day time heat unlike a fireside night time can actually kill you just by waiting through it, and that the average summer day is much longer than your quoted night lengths.   I don't feel like melting in the summer heat because someone else didn't  know how the game works. 

[J20hawkz]

You are ignoring the relevant content of the post you quoted.  Alot of your reasoning seems to make sense if we ignore summer and that the day time heat unlike a fireside night time can actually kill you just by waiting through it, and that the average summer day is much longer than your quoted night lengths.   I don't feel like melting in the summer heat because someone else didn't  know how the game works.

Sorry.

Waiting in summer during the Day is between 90 - 150 seconds. Granted the minimum wait time is longer but the maximum time is the same as if you chose to sleep during Dusk/Night.

I didn't feel the need to include Summer and sleeping during the day to avoid over heating, as it's something we should already know of and do more often than we would to skip the later parts of the day.

Again waiting can be passed by spectating other players. Most likely everyone will choose to sleep once they realise the reason for doing it (if they didn't already).

Thoughts?

[randompandora]

but its essentially the same issue, everyone sleeping at the same time, whether its for day or night.  That summer can kill you and night is not as big an issue to just wait through (if you have light and fuel) so the discussion should really be based around daytime sleeping.  That's my concern. 

[MrKoopa]

About sleeping in tents: I think it could be so that the player that chooses to sleep have to wait until the day comes.

 

About death: I Think that the player that activates Touch Stone will get 1 more life.

So if there is ex 3 players and 1 of them activates the Touch Stone the player that activated it will resurrect the player but those that have not activated it will die perm. And if the same player activates one more then he can be resurrected 2 times and the other players 0 times.

 

About Sanity: 1 person insane and the rest of the team sane = only 1 person will see the shadow creatures but if 2 are insane and 2 sane then those that are insane will see the same monsters and the rest of the team will not see them.

 

About Chester: Regens Health but slower. Mabe 400 hp instead of 450? Players are able to store items in Chesters that the player does not "own" but that one of the friends "own".