Cicero Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Please post reasonable suggestions for the harvesting formula. Only post your formula, and a short description or explanation. Any other posts will be deleted. "no delay" is not an acceptable formula. After a while, I will make a new poll with these formulas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Platyna Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Max 2 seconds delay. Why? Heh read Roja's and others thread I am bored repeating all the time same thing. :-P And what was wrong with people voting if they like the changes or not? No one was bitching or flaming. Regards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cicero Report post Posted November 23, 2004 That was actually how I was going to do it originally, but then level/4 got a lot more votes... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gen_Axis Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Oki, im risking getting banned but im desperated. Why not make it like : http://www.eternal-lands.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=9753 ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Platyna Report post Posted November 23, 2004 (edited) No, Cicero, believe me whole community is flaming that change. Make it max 2 seconds and you will be EL Jesus Christ. *sigh* Or make it one second max and increase failure rate, so it will adjust harvest time kinda "naturally", higher failure rate, more time between successful harvests. It is kinda sane and will encourage people to get higher level. Well of course you say macroing, but current change encourages macroing even more. We can always work something out on GSD about preventing macroing anyway. Only 20 people voted for /4, twice of them voted "none" and another significiant part chosen dumb opitions such like kidney one. Heh. Regards. Edited November 23, 2004 by Platyna Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ember Report post Posted November 23, 2004 I believe that 4sec vote was mostly because they thought like me that Lvl Requierments was part of that vote... I personly havent been able to log in but from what everyone is telling me they dont like it much... So how about reimplimenting those harvest lvls? Small minded idea i know Emby Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cicero Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Actually, I'm thinking the other way around. Remove failure entirely, and have only the delay. At the moment, there's no player perceived difference anyway. The new delay formula then would need to be based on the player's harvest level and a random factor, to make it act like the failure rate did before. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Platyna Report post Posted November 23, 2004 It will make leveling up harvest kinda useless, and some people treat it as a hobby. Now failure rate could adjust harvest delay according to the level and could save you alot of coding. Regards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cicero Report post Posted November 23, 2004 How would it make leveling up useless? I would just be including the delay that the failure would cause and the regular delay into the same formula. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mihaim Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Actually, I'm thinking the other way around. Remove failure entirely, and have only the delay. At the moment, there's no player perceived difference anyway. The new delay formula then would need to be based on the player's harvest level and a random factor, to make it act like the failure rate did before. I would prefer the higher failure instead of delay. it's about psycology .... Delaying things means the player tends to pay attention to graphics and game details. Or the game at this point have a VERRY limited number of items (weapons, things to harvest, spells , etc etc etc). I remember a site that has like 300 different swords for RPG. We do not have a verry high level of graphic details but we compensate by the game dinamic . The simple fact that ppl can do things fast is a good psychological factor . It distracts ppl from detais and same time creates the feeling of "wow i can do things". But if the formula needs to change i propose this: Seconds_to_wait = (Item.Level + player.might) / player.harvesting_level Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Platyna Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Cicero, you know a cookie philosophy? If you want your kid to do his homework you promise him a cookie, he knows he will eat it in one second but it is still a cookie, it is cool that you will get it, you want it. In this case a cookie is lower delay in harvesting what for code new special forumula which will decrease delay for harvesting according to the level if failure rate which is already done will do it for you?It will save up coding because failure rate for items seems to be already implemented. Increase it by 2 add 1 second delay and we are all done. Or leave old failure rate and bring level requirements to harvest - it should kinda cut macro a little and move harvest potions market, they will cost nice cash like on old server so people will have a motivation to get vegatal nexus to 5. Regards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cicero Report post Posted November 23, 2004 It's really a trivial amount of code for either adjusting the delay or the failure. And like I already said, they players can't perceive a difference between a failed harvest and a longer delay between harvests. What does make a difference is that the harvesting code gets processed more for no good reason if someone is failing a lot. That's why I'm saying we just rewrite the failure formula so that it adds a delay instead, and we're getting closer to normal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Platyna Report post Posted November 23, 2004 If you say so. Whatever you do harvest needs to be faster ASAP. It is incredible boring thing. :-) Regards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brian_Huting Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Actually, I'm thinking the other way around. Remove failure entirely, and have only the delay. At the moment, there's no player perceived difference anyway. The new delay formula then would need to be based on the player's harvest level and a random factor, to make it act like the failure rate did before. I would prefer the higher failure instead of delay. it's about psycology .... Delaying things means the player tends to pay attention to graphics and game details. Or the game at this point have a VERRY limited number of items (weapons, things to harvest, spells , etc etc etc). I remember a site that has like 300 different swords for RPG. We do not have a verry high level of graphic details but we compensate by the game dinamic . The simple fact that ppl can do things fast is a good psychological factor . It distracts ppl from detais and same time creates the feeling of "wow i can do things". But if the formula needs to change i propose this: Seconds_to_wait = (Item.Level + player.might) / player.harvesting_level I agree with this. I am falling asleep already here behind my keyboard so plz make higher failure rate and no more delay Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goatsgomoo Report post Posted November 23, 2004 X - H - R + I = D X = Some random number. Make something up. H = Harvest level R = Rationality I = The reccomended level of the item being harvested. D = Delay. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cicero Report post Posted November 23, 2004 Meh, nevermind. I'm just going to tweak the test server and ask for feedback. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
