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.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

All posts created by Bob

Bob
We're pretty convinced that the water is ultimately a solvable problem, just one that's going to take some time to fix. In many ways, if putting in a workaround rose to the top of our priority list, that would probably mean we could invest just a little more time into it and actually just plain get water working. The brief mention of it in Finding Your Path was really just me figuring it was worth throwing in as long as I was in the middle of writing so much dialogue, and that it would be easy to adjust when we can finally get water working. The lack of water would turn into a historical footnote, the long drought known as Earthly Exsiccation.

Then again, if we start down that road and it turns out water is an even bigger problem than we thought, then we've talked about doing things along the lines above, and making the lack of water a bigger part of the story in an appropriate way.
Bob
Flari-Merchant
It does make getting to that pine log gusher a challenge even though pine log does now occur in more places. It is technically "there" in more places. Gushering it is still a dream, but I can't say that I have gathered in all hexes since your last tweak either.

Along with upping the amount of pine overall, I added quite a few more hexes where pine appears in abundance, and scattered them around the map a bit. You'll know pretty quickly if you're in one of the better hexes just based on what you're gathering, so you should be able to find a decent hex with a little hunting.
Bob
Flari-Merchant
Do you think that increased material regen rates are why, even though there may be 10 material types in a certain node in a hex, gushers in that hex and specific node types always seem to be only of a few types

I don't think it makes too much difference in the long-run, at least in terms of how often the rarer materials get selected for gushers. The biggest difference would probably be that lowering the regen rate enough would result in a more regular pattern of gusher distribution. As each material ran low, other materials would have an increased chance of appearing in gushers, but then they'd have a long time to wait before they had much chance at all of appearing. For example, if you had a hex that held 10 pieces of pine for every 1 piece of maple, gushers would tend to run in stretches of 8-12 pine, then 1 maple, over and over. Even if everything stayed the same, this is probably what would happen if enough gatherers showed up to keep a hex constantly running pretty low on materials, since again each maple gusher would drive that material so low that you could probably get 8-12 pine gushers before there's enough maple available to even make a maple gusher possible, much less likely. Overall, you'd see roughly 10 pine gushers for every maple gusher, appearing in a somewhat regular pattern.

With the current levels of material availability, given current regen rates, material starting numbers, and overall gathering activity, gushers generally don't drive the material numbers low enough to enforce a regular pattern. However, because gushers follow the same odds formula that gathering does, over time you should still get roughly 10 pine gushers for every maple gusher, but with the pattern completely randomized. You're very likely to see streaks of 30-40 pine gushers before getting a single maple gusher, and sometimes even to get short streaks of maple gushers. You may also sometimes only get 1-3 pine gushers before another maple gusher. Those really long streaks of pine probably give the impression that you just never get maple, even if overall you're getting maple just as often as you would under a stricter pattern.
Bob
Smitty
Question about settlements - are folks going to be able to pick the different settlement layouts in the polish stage ( 7 options diagrammed in the bottom of the fire side chat from August 2015)?

There's a lot of art work needed to get those layout variants working, including a pretty significant terrain pass. As a result, they're beyond the scope of any polish work and likely won't be tackled very soon.

Smitty
Along with that - there are plots that currently we cant use ( only can have 2 large plots etc) - I was under the impression that the extra space(s) were waiting on the other roles to be released .. i take it that is still the case.

The balance was actually set around never being able to use those spots for typical structures, so we'd discussed eventually creating some more decorative things that could be put there, or at least structures that filled an entirely different role. However, that would again require a lot of art work, and therefore wouldn't likely get done very soon.
Bob
Contracts were very high on the list of things we wanted to include in the roadmap, but they just didn't quite make the cut. Hopefully we'll be able to take another look at them soon.
Bob
Edam
Assuming:
- a settlement puts down one +3 structure and runs it at +3 in month #1 (the rest of the structures are low or missing)
- the current actual settlement level is 10 that week

Then the "Adjusted Settlement Level" for that one +3 structure will be the current Settlement Level of 10 plus 6 more for double "structure plus", less the 3, which give a interim result of 10+6-3=13. We then subtract 1 for being month 1 and get an "Adjusted Settlement Level" of 12 meaning our +3 structure will train and have a facility rating equivalent to a level 12 settlement?

Since it's a +3 structure, it will always run at least at the equivalent of a level 16 settlement, so the adjusted settlement level can be ignored in this case (+0=10, +1=12, +2=14, +3=16, +4=18, +5=20). However, if the settlement level ran at 15 during month #1 (which just to be clear is actually the second month, we're using programmer math here where counting starts at zero), then the adjusted settlement level would be 17 (15+6-3-1=17), so the +3 structure would run like it would now in a level 17 settlement (sort of like a +3.5). Likewise, if the settlement level was 18, then the +3 structure would run like a +5 (level 20) structure during that month, dropping by a level each month until it hit that minimum of 16.
Bob
Maxen
But in all seriousness, I only use +3 kits for all tiers and all my gatherers are Rank 15 or 16. My experience has been that T2 gushers often take longer than T3. I’ve had T2s push an hour and a half, and that’s way too long in my opinion. I feel like T1s should take 30 minutes, T2 should take 45 minutes, and T3 should take 1 hour. These times would be give or take a few minutes based on kit level and gatherer skill. Dedicating more than an hour to standing around and killing mobs is painful. You also prevent players who can’t dedicate more than an hour or two from working gushers. If I’ve got 1.5 hours to play in the evening and I have to find a gusher first (yes, I’ve got them on the the first pull, but more often after 20 or 30 pulls), I’ve already precluded myself from working a T2 or T3 to completion due to time limits. Just my $0.02 US.

We've figured out the problem here, should be a pretty easy fix for the next update.

Meanwhile, the problem only affects T2 Harvesting Kits +1/3/5, so just save those until the next update and use +0/2/4 instead. It doesn't affect T1/3 Kits at all, so no worries when using any upgrades of those.
Bob
Your theory on what happened is basically correct. Originally, we marked a wider area around Thornkeep and Fort Inevitable as NPC hexes (blue shields), but later decided to open up more territory. We similarly decided to open up the territory around NPC settlements like Marchmont and Kindleburn. We were able to pretty easily take the shields away and raise the resources in those hexes to T2, but many of the hexes need a terrain pass to give them places for holdings.

A full terrain pass would be difficult to fit in right now, so I'm debating between either creating temporary spots for holdings (which means converting the 30m encounter spot closest to the middle, which likely wouldn't be in the best spot and would force the holding to move when a full terrain pass is done), or re-marking the problem hexes as some kind of half-NPC hex (maybe a yellow shield, meaning that it basically acts like a wilderness hex but is protected from being claimed). Neither is trivial, so I'm not sure exactly when I'll be able to get to them, but I think they fall pretty solidly under the kind of polish we're planning to get to toward the end of the roadmap.
Bob
Edam
Will this system continue with the new settlement mechanics? Will settlement level 19 continue to be "good enough" for level 20 character support ?

We're not planning any changes to the overall support mechanics any time soon, including the rounding component, so you can continue to use settlement level 19 to get almost exactly the same feat support as you get for settlement level 20.

Edam
From month 7 onwards it appears you need BOTH settlement level 20 that week and the relevant structure at +5 that week to get level 20 training and level 20 queue times for that week. Is that correct?

If the trainer levels and facility ratings from the structure itself are better than what the Adjusted Settlement Level (or for that matter the actual Settlement Level) would provide, then you get whatever the structure provides, so the Settlement Level won't drag you down. I'll clean up and/or remove the "provided the actual settlement level" phrases in the last two months to clarify that.
Bob
Bug report filed to take a break. It's something we've always wanted to do, but not sure when we'll be able to fit that in with all our other priorities.