global pool is a bad idea and here's why.

[shubla]

Just make the liklihood of finding pearls etc dependant on how many you have already found.

But why? Botters can just make more chars .

[magisticus]

Just make the liklihood of finding pearls etc dependant on how many you have already found.

But why? Botters can just make more chars .

It's an embuggerance to them to train up per exp on new characters, at the very least it would slow down the botting by having PC resources spent on that and the LP cost of the new characters would at least outweigh the use of pearls as study items. You can also make pearls/flotsams accessible in small quantities to the non-botters without significantly affecting the total number in world.

[SnuggleSnail]

it's not something I would do for the sole reason I don't give a shit about any foragable beyond the first week or the world, but I think you're overestimating the effort of putting 3 bluebells on a study table and running a script that harvests and eats some carrots lol

[magisticus]

it's not something I would do for the sole reason I don't give a shit about any foragable beyond the first week or the world, but I think you're overestimating the effort of putting 3 bluebells on a study table and running a script that harvests and eats some carrots lol

I didn't say it was difficult, it just takes time which is time a client is running without producing anything.

[Sevenless]

it's not something I would do for the sole reason I don't give a shit about any foragable beyond the first week or the world, but I think you're overestimating the effort of putting 3 bluebells on a study table and running a script that harvests and eats some carrots lol

I didn't say it was difficult, it just takes time which is time a client is running without producing anything.

There are clients capable of running instances of characters without displaying the world graphically for finished bots. These clients take almost no resources to run and can be running in the background while you actively play on a character.

[shubla]

Did some foraging. 5 flotsams in half an hour or so!
In early world I saw 0 of them.
Its just terribly dumb.

[Sevenless]

Did some foraging. 5 flotsams in half an hour or so!
In early world I saw 0 of them.
Its just terribly dumb.

I don't think 10 flotsam an hour is exactly what we should be aiming for though

[shubla]

I don't think 10 flotsam an hour is exactly what we should be aiming for though

Well no, but difference like that is stupid. It should be even experience throughout the world.

[Sevenless]

I don't think 10 flotsam an hour is exactly what we should be aiming for though

Well no, but difference like that is stupid. It should be even experience throughout the world.

You mean a system that makes an even distribution of forageables for each player based on themselves and not the activity of other players? A system that's almost like you're fated to find things?

Sounds like a great idea!

[magisticus]

I don't think 10 flotsam an hour is exactly what we should be aiming for though

Well no, but difference like that is stupid. It should be even experience throughout the world.

You mean a system that makes an even distribution of forageables for each player based on themselves and not the activity of other players? A system that's almost like you're fated to find things?

Sounds like a great idea!

Fate wasn't exactly that.. it was more of an uneven distribution based on each player.

But based on each player one way or another would be better, meaning everyone can interact with the game regardless of much some are abusing it. Again I return to diminishing returns the more of one thing you find.