Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

EE 13

Bob
On the topic of Black in particular, there were some problems with the estimated demand calculations that resulted in it (and similar T1-2 resources) definitely being under-represented on the map. Some hacks were made a long time ago to fix the T1-2 resources that had the same problem, but they were made before T3 was really an issue, so we weren't really worried about them at the time and held off on doing that work. Now that it and other resource balance issues have risen near the top of the priority list, I'm finally able to dedicate enough time to sort the problem out properly. I still plan for it to wind up being relatively scare, but the degree to which it's scarce is far beyond what was originally intended.
Bob
Nihimon
Bob, one other thing…

When you're rebalancing the resources, can you also fix the differences between the Bulk Resources sheet and the Hexes sheet with respect to terrain type?

-19, 8 : Bulk Resources says "Highlands", but Hexes says "Croplands"
-18, 0 : Highlands vs Croplands
-18, 8 : Croplands vs Highlands
-13, 0 : Croplands vs highlands
-3, 3 : Highlands vs Mountains
2, -5 : Woodlands vs Mountains
2, 6 : Woodlands vs Croplands
4, 17 : Croplands vs Woodlands

4, 17 is just east of Phaeros so it's been pretty obvious there was something wrong there for a while now. The in-game map clearly shows it as a Woodlands hex. When you're running around in the hex, it's clearly a Woodlands hex. But pfomap.com shows it as a Croplands hex. And if you harvest there, you get Wool, Cotton, and Coal from Scavenger Nodes, and you get Ordered and Resonant Essence from Dowser Nodes - all of which is usually limited to Croplands hexes.

Unless of course it's "a feature, not a bug" that a single hex can have one terrain type in one context and another terrain type in another context…

PS - this is just a list of hexes where the data in the spreadsheets is inconsistent. I have not tried to determine if either source of data in the spreadsheets is consistent with reality.

Yes, this is one of the things I was going to look into. I already have a bug pointing out at least one of those problem hexes, and I'll add the rest to that bug to make sure I look at all of them.
Smitty
@Bob. While semi on the blacj topic… can you explain why ink comes in 2 for a refine… and all other apothecary tefines apoeae to produce 3.?
Fiery
Of note, PR has always been willing to trade black, albeit at a high (though I feel not unreasonable) price. It is scarce far beyond anything else in the game, especially considering how often it gets poached/stripped. That being said, black is a particular issue - Bob has mentioned before making less required to make spellbooks by a significant degree, and a bit more on the map is called for. That being said, I think we need regional scarcity, and I think t3 is the best way to promote it. I've long been a fan of making t3 both scarce and regionalized - scarcity will drive pvp unlike anything else. Scarcity is always the best driver of economies and conflict. There also needs to be some change to the current stripping issues - currently the effort:impact ratio is horribly skewed, allowing a single dedicated gatherer to strip, and keep stripped, multiple hexes.
Flari-Merchant
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
Since you have asked, I wouldn't mind reading about your plans for "Raiding".

I'll post a more detailed thread about this on Monday.
OK how about "Mule Doors" will they be on ranch holdings or something else? I assume that all permissioned players will be able to use them?
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
OK how about "Mule Doors" will they be on ranch holdings or something else? I assume that all permissioned players will be able to use them?

My plan was to add mules to all the holdings at some level of upgrade, and the most straight-forward way to do that was to add them at +2. In many cases, that means that going to +1 adds refinining capabilities, then +2 will get you mules, which feels like a good way to handle upgrades.

Adding them to so many different holding models made it tricky to try to attach the mules to a separate door in every case, so instead I created a mule sign on a short post, and you'll right-click on the sign to bring up the mule interface.

Currently, I don't believe that mules are restricted by Settlement Access settings, so I think everyone would be able to purchase them either at settlements or holdings. I'll write up a feature request to see about either adding them to one of the existing permissions or creating a separate permission for them.
Bob
Smitty
@Bob. While semi on the blacj topic… can you explain why ink comes in 2 for a refine… and all other apothecary tefines apoeae to produce 3.?

That's just where they wound up to produce the estimated value that was being targeted. Varnish recipes produce 6 instead of 3 for similar reasons.

Interestingly, if those recipes had originally been set to produce 3 instead of two, that would have just reduced the amount of black our original formulas said to put out into the world, so it wouldn't have changed the scarcity situation.

All that said, I am looking at the possibility of increasing the output from ink recipes. Even with some of the changes I'm planning to make to the distribution formulas, upping production numbers would only have a small effect on the overall scarcity issue, but it appears that spellbooks are one of the more expensive crafted goods relative to their target value according to our estimated value calculations. Those value calculations are admittedly largely theoretical, but it's still best to keep them internally consistent unless there's a compelling reason to override them. Lowering the estimated value of inks might bring them more in line with other crafted goods, or might just push them to the other extreme, so it's back to the math mines for me.
Flari-Merchant
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
OK how about "Mule Doors" will they be on ranch holdings or something else? I assume that all permissioned players will be able to use them?

My plan was to add mules to all the holdings at some level of upgrade, and the most straight-forward way to do that was to add them at +2. In many cases, that means that going to +1 adds refinining capabilities, then +2 will get you mules, which feels like a good way to handle upgrades.

Adding them to so many different holding models made it tricky to try to attach the mules to a separate door in every case, so instead I created a mule sign on a short post, and you'll right-click on the sign to bring up the mule interface.

Currently, I don't believe that mules are restricted by Settlement Access settings, so I think everyone would be able to purchase them either at settlements or holdings. I'll write up a feature request to see about either adding them to one of the existing permissions or creating a separate permission for them.

Thanks for the reply! smile
Gross
Even though I am not directly impacted with a cleric / gatherer I can see black is a real game balance problem as one character class essentially cannot have its needs met by available resources even without a monopoly, and that need is also a PvP balance issue.

As a game there must be a path for players to pursue to meet legitimate needs of their characters or they will get frustrated and wander off. We don't need enough black production in game for one book per T3 wizard but do need at least enough for one per t3 wizard player per month or so… and distributed so no one group can frustrate all others.

Could just increase the black salvage drops to increase attractiveness of grinding…
Mercenary monster hunter from Forgeholm
War priest of Angradd… patiently waiting on Goblinworks to deliver him (and greataxes, Dwarves need 2 handed axes).
Nihimon
Gross
[We need Black]… distributed so no one group can frustrate all others.

I think that's impossible when you're talking about Gathering. It's just too easy for even a single player to keep even half a dozen T3 hexes stripped bare (once it's been stripped bare to start). If they try to compensate with dropped resources, I think that would seriously undermine the value of Gathering.

I took the following quote from Bob to mean that he's aware of the problem and will address it when the time is right.

Bob
I don't know whether or not we'll be able to re-examine that system as part of this rebalance, but it's something I'd very much like to review at some point.
Nihimon murmurs in sheer ecstasy as the magic courses through his veins
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post