Are there any future plans of the north part of the world ?

[[CB] Pandasama]

If you look at the world map you can see red biomes on the south - this is ashlands. And as far as I know, for correct generation of future content, it is better not to explore these areas in the current game version.

But if you loook at the north of the map - you can see a lot of white/snow biom.
Is this just standard mountain biom? Or in the far future there is something new on the north too, and it's better not travel there too?

[Nerevar]

thats the deep north. the planned final biome that comes after ashlands. so same rule as ashlands apply.

the deep north can spawn the regular mountain biome but that might chance once they start working on it. which wont happen until ashlands is released.

[lumina]

From my understanding, there are two biomes left to release, so that would make sense.

Also, while you'd ruin spawning future content there if you explore, I'm not sure it really matters. I haven't experimented with this myself, but according to these forums, it's always better to spawn a new map after new biomes release. Something about the land/terrain not generating correctly on pre-update maps. Of course, this could change in the years it takes to get to that update.

[[CB] Pandasama]

it's always better to spawn a new map after new biomes release

I like Valheim but I'd rather delete it forever than start the game again

[lumina]

Originally posted by CB Pandasama:

it's always better to spawn a new map after new biomes release

I like Valheim but I'd rather delete it forever than start the game again

Fair enough haha. You can take your current character/gear to a new world so you don't lose progression but I understand not wanting to lose everything you've built, explored, and portals all over.

[Nerevar]

Originally posted by lumina:

From my understanding, there are two biomes left to release, so that would make sense.

Also, while you'd ruin spawning future content there if you explore, I'm not sure it really matters. I haven't experimented with this myself, but according to these forums, it's always better to spawn a new map after new biomes release. Something about the land/terrain not generating correctly on pre-update maps. Of course, this could change in the years it takes to get to that update.

its not better in generel. the devs are always trying thier best to make sure even very old worlds work with new updates ASLONG as you leave areas unexplored. they have testworlds from 2021 just for this for thier internal playtests.

its only better if you explored ALOT of the unexplored map or if you explored a huge part of ashlands or deep north for no good reason.

[Rhino]

Originally posted by Nerevar:

Originally posted by lumina:

From my understanding, there are two biomes left to release, so that would make sense.

Also, while you'd ruin spawning future content there if you explore, I'm not sure it really matters. I haven't experimented with this myself, but according to these forums, it's always better to spawn a new map after new biomes release. Something about the land/terrain not generating correctly on pre-update maps. Of course, this could change in the years it takes to get to that update.

its not better in generel. the devs are always trying thier best to make sure even very old worlds work with new updates ASLONG as you leave areas unexplored. they have testworlds from 2021 just for this for thier internal playtests.

its only better if you explored ALOT of the unexplored map or if you explored a huge part of ashlands or deep north for no good reason.

for no good reason ? Is that a joke ?

[Humpenstilzchen]

Originally posted by Rhino:

Originally posted by Nerevar:

its not better in generel. the devs are always trying thier best to make sure even very old worlds work with new updates ASLONG as you leave areas unexplored. they have testworlds from 2021 just for this for thier internal playtests.

its only better if you explored ALOT of the unexplored map or if you explored a huge part of ashlands or deep north for no good reason.

for no good reason ? Is that a joke ?

Can you name any good reason to explore empty placeholder biomes when there is nothing of value and when you know that it will ruin future terrain generation when those areas get their overhaul?

[Nerevar]

Originally posted by Rhino:

Originally posted by Nerevar:

its not better in generel. the devs are always trying thier best to make sure even very old worlds work with new updates ASLONG as you leave areas unexplored. they have testworlds from 2021 just for this for thier internal playtests.

its only better if you explored ALOT of the unexplored map or if you explored a huge part of ashlands or deep north for no good reason.

for no good reason ? Is that a joke ?

not at all. there is nothing in the deep north aside that one fish type.

same for ashlands. going for flametal now would ruin too much of the landscape. not worth it as i dont wanna speed up ashlands progression and be done faster when its the only content comeing in 2024 for this game most likely.

[Zombits]

thought the queen was final boss. what's the point with small updates adding little to the game. also the time it takes to sail at poles

[Nerevar]

Originally posted by Zombits:

thought the queen was final boss. what's the point with small updates adding little to the game. also the time it takes to sail at poles

why would the "final" boss drop something called "QUEEN DROP" as a placeholder item if it was the last boss`?

the ashlands and deep north biomes where on the map since years. they where always planned.

and ashlands isnt a small update. its the 2nd big update actually. after mistlands. mistlands didnt exist on release of EA. or rather it did exist but just like ashlands and deep north do now : it was mostly empty space with a few webbed trees.

[Zombits]

Originally posted by Nerevar:

Originally posted by Zombits:

thought the queen was final boss. what's the point with small updates adding little to the game. also the time it takes to sail at poles

why would the "final" boss drop something called "QUEEN DROP" as a placeholder item if it was the last boss`?

the ashlands and deep north biomes where on the map since years. they where always planned.

and ashlands isnt a small update. its the 2nd big update actually. after mistlands. mistlands didnt exist on release of EA. or rather it did exist but just like ashlands and deep north do now : it was mostly empty space with a few webbed trees.

I saw 6 statues at game start with no new spot. I'm just a casuaI player , idk . wouldn't mind if they erased completely Mistland biomes. it really sucked.

I was aware of deep north and south as places I went to fish last year for achievement

[saurce]

Originally posted by Zombits:

Originally posted by Nerevar:

why would the "final" boss drop something called "QUEEN DROP" as a placeholder item if it was the last boss`?

the ashlands and deep north biomes where on the map since years. they where always planned.

and ashlands isnt a small update. its the 2nd big update actually. after mistlands. mistlands didnt exist on release of EA. or rather it did exist but just like ashlands and deep north do now : it was mostly empty space with a few webbed trees.

I saw 6 statues at game start with no new spot. I'm just a casuaI player , idk . wouldn't mind if they erased completely Mistland biomes. it really sucked.

True

[Nerevar]

Originally posted by Zombits:

Originally posted by Nerevar:

why would the "final" boss drop something called "QUEEN DROP" as a placeholder item if it was the last boss`?

the ashlands and deep north biomes where on the map since years. they where always planned.

and ashlands isnt a small update. its the 2nd big update actually. after mistlands. mistlands didnt exist on release of EA. or rather it did exist but just like ashlands and deep north do now : it was mostly empty space with a few webbed trees.

I saw 6 statues at game start with no new spot. I'm just a casuaI player , idk . wouldn't mind if they erased completely Mistland biomes. it really sucked.

I was aware of deep north and south as places I went to fish last year for achievement

there is no achievments yet. so no idea what you mean there.

and that central circle of stones has currently 6 stones yes. and it was 5 stones before mistlands got added. so that current stone counter means nothing as they can widen the circle on demand it has a huge no build zone around it. for a reason.

mistlands was great. sure there is a loud minority crying about it till today because they didnt want to adjust and the devs achieved what they wanted : a new biome that wasnt viewed as "perfect" by anyone and hated by some because they wanted to make sure the game is remaining BRUTAL survival means biomes should get harder and not easier as you progress. and the 2 biomes after swamp kinda failed at that. mistlands put it back on track.

and eraseing a biome for an existing explored map is not even possible as it requires editing the savefile.

[vinyblaster]

Originally posted by Nerevar:

Originally posted by Zombits:

I saw 6 statues at game start with no new spot. I'm just a casuaI player , idk . wouldn't mind if they erased completely Mistland biomes. it really sucked.

I was aware of deep north and south as places I went to fish last year for achievement

there is no achievments yet. so no idea what you mean there.

and that central circle of stones has currently 6 stones yes. and it was 5 stones before mistlands got added. so that current stone counter means nothing as they can widen the circle on demand it has a huge no build zone around it. for a reason.

mistlands was great. sure there is a loud minority crying about it till today because they didnt want to adjust and the devs achieved what they wanted : a new biome that wasnt viewed as "perfect" by anyone and hated by some because they wanted to make sure the game is remaining BRUTAL survival means biomes should get harder and not easier as you progress. and the 2 biomes after swamp kinda failed at that. mistlands put it back on track.

and eraseing a biome for an existing explored map is not even possible as it requires editing the savefile.

The ones who like mistlands are the minority. And i will provide the same amount of evidence to back my claim as you did to back yours.

[sirstevolot]

Playing vanilla solo since Valheim's release I've still got my first world with my first character and the only reason I went to the Deep North early is to set a portal for future progression then snag a Northern Salmon for the fishing hat. From the beginning they told us they would enable future updates to work with previous worlds given you haven't explored it all so multiplayer campaigns may have issues if y'all really enjoy sailing haha. Some odd comments above, just take casual's advice with a grain of salt imo. Mistlands was a blast in progression. Harvesting ancient giant's skulls and synthesizing the tissue with sap from the tree of life- like, come on that's sick af. The Queen fight is incredible, too. I'm super stoked for Ashlands. Not all are worthy of Valhalla muahahaha! I'll bet the same players who hate Mistlands will flame Ashlands, too. At least they've got sliders to fall back on now and devs won't have to cater to them with nerfs like Mistlands was a couple weeks after release. GL!