Stonehearth goes 1.0!


I thought about that too!
A bit differently. PVP allowed, of course. Tons of random spawns (chests) with better gear, a new combat role that is able to use all of it and consumables for healing and such.

Instead of the void, I imagined a “titan storm” or sandstorm like effect that comes from all sides. We’d just need proper matchmaking :smiley:


Paging @not_owen_wilson for future reference, though right now, Chris is out of the office and won’t be back until the 23rd. From my basic understanding: the problem is this: houses can be constructed with near 100% accuracy by hearthlings because you start the building, usually in a clear space, from scratch, so you can make a dependency map that makes sense, and work on the house from the inside out. This begins to fall apart if your house is in a cave or on a cliff, but it REALLY falls apart when you allow arbitrary destruction. What if a bomb went off and destroyed the very middle of a 100x100x100 voxel cube that offers no access to the outside world? This is an extreme case, but partial building destruction and remodeling would have to take edge cases like this into account. I’d say that the system as it is might work 90% of the time if you just managed to turn on “build on top of existing structure” much like we have “build on terrain faces” but the last 10% would be super buggy. In the end, a manual, player interference solution might have to be the answer, if you wanted to go there.


Let’s plan to keep it up after 1.1 in December. We do pay to have it up and running and beautiful as it is, so in theory, at some point, we might need to shut it down, but we’ll try to let you know if this becomes a serious issue.


That might be a long shot but would it be possible to make buildings “behave” (become) terrain blocks after building is 100% finished? You would be able to mine it, I guess :joy: but also reform it as you please I guess. Dunno if that would work though - and I guess they wouldn’t count as buildings anymore… yeah, nevermind :expressionless:


Thanks for these details. Curious your thoughts about one idea to move the chains here:

What if, when you (the player) edits a finished building, a current state snapshot is taken. The player then modified the building (add/remove/edit voxels or fixtures, removing/adding roofs, etc), and fresh build calculation is performed, using the before state snapshot as the starting point?

In theory, at least, this could increase the odds that a change could be completed successfully.

You may need to pause the game while editing and existing building though, to ensure the building’s composition didn’t change again in the time it took for the player to perform their edits (like another bomb going off).

That said, you could fix that by waiting to take the before snapshot until the player hits Build on the proposed changes. If the tasks require access to voxels that no longer exist, they light up red and the player has to resolve them manually, or perform a new edit (which creates a fresh snapshot).

Huge caveat: the above is based purely on how I suspect building works under the hood today. As such, my idea could be deeply flawed.

If it’s not flawed though, this wouldn’t solve for dynamic Hearthlings-initiated repair of established structures, but it would allow for easy things like “oh damn, I forgot to cut a whole in this floor for a staircase. Oh… right… I also forgot the staircase itself! And while I’m here, one more window and a wall lantern would be nice.”



The problem is: what if there is NO WAY at all for a hearthling to reach the modified area? Imagine you have a building that is a 100x100x100 cube. A a 1x1x1 burrowing animal crawls in through one side, eats out the middle of the cube, and then crawls back out. How does the hearthling standing on the outside get inside the cube to fix it? They could start deconstructing the cube from the outside to get to the inside, but that’s beyond the current capabilities of the building editor.

You could make hearthlings reach infinitely far. That would solve it if the entrance hole is reachable, but undermines most of the work of the current building editor; just us IB in that case. And what if the entrance hole was made on the bottom surface of the cube?

Anyway, this is a sort of reductionist example, but you can imagine it coming up because someone has a really cool shaped roof and one voxel is somehow needs to be fixed but is in the middle of the structure.


I hear what you’re saying. But by only making purposeful, player-instigated modifications to existing buildings, you’re limiting their actions only to things the player specifically requests. If the AI can’t path to something, you just have to inform the player of what the problem likely is, so they can take action to fix it.

In your 1-block critter example, I might use the hole tool to widen a path to the middle, submit that job, wait for them to finish deconstructing those voxels, then do another modify job to to fill it back in again working from the inside out.


Could it be reduced to at least a simplistic editing, for example?

Painting changes (no shape changes); fixture swapping (changing doors, windows, etc…) or texture changes? (like swapping the roof color or something like that.)


I think those are both good ideas, and theoretically possible. Noting for @not_owen_wilson when he’s back later this month. :slight_smile: Also the entire builder is in lua, so feel free to take a closer look.


Fingers crossed!

Thank you so much for the effort on this last push :heart:


Thanks for the information Stephanie, much appreciated.


@sdee: Who from the team is remaining on until December, and who are leaving at the end of July?


Did something change in release 874 with stone fences?
hearthlings refuses to build one of my shared templates for mason until i removed stone fences next to a block on the house


Probably better to ask on that release’s thread:


what happens to some of the unfinished professions=? cook comes to my mind for example


To clarify on the idea that none of the classes are getting their (not yet implemented) features, are all of the classes whose items don’t have various quality tiers going to be left as is?


Is there any chance to get a list of objects which are planned to be added? I may find some time to update LostEms today and I wouldn’t like to add another bunch of objects which will be added later.

The most important question is if coloured tall clay windows and comfy stone furniture are planned.


Just caught up with the news on Stonehearth, I’m currently heavily invested in finishing my degree.
A few points from my perspective, and I really hope @sdee gets a chance to read ( and maybe reply to?) this:

  1. I am very happy and thankful for your development time, I felt to be involved in the process and it brought me closer to the development of games, as a direct result, quite a few of my social media activity involves following devs.

  2. While I can understand the grief of others about cut features and I myself would have liked to see magic in the game as some sort of endgame tier class (I just love the picture of the fighting party with an arcanist from the KS), this game has evolved so much - sure, you could say it isn’t quite the KS-game anymore, but it’s so much more than that! - I am really happy for you guys that you have found the point to bring it to an end.

  3. Please, please consider my ONLY wish for this game: Bring the kickstarter rewards “score music” and “artbook” as DLC to steam. I would very happily pay 3-5 $/€ for them. I learned too late from this game to back it on KS and I just love the art created for this game.
    I had really hoped you would bring the kickstarter pets as DLC eventually, too, but I can live without them.

Finally, I want to say a big and heartfelt thank you for the time of your lives you invested in this pearl of a game, a game I hopefully can let my future children play, when they are old enough to make their steps in the digital world.