Crop quality limits critique.

Thoughts on the further development of Haven & Hearth? Feel free to opine!

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby vatas » Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:44 pm

LunarArchon wrote:Maybe some of these issues can be mitigated by removing crop Quality capping and focusing on highly variable regional growth speed and yield.

Example:
Region A has flax that grows in 1-2 days while Region B has flax that takes 6-7. Farmers in A will have plenty of high Q flax while farmers in B will lag behind. The real estate in Region A would be valuable but this is mitigated by Region A having other crops that take 9 days to grow.

Players get to grow any high Q crops that they have either traded or cultivated. Trade is encouraged but not required as long as you are patient / can deal with slow Q growth. Random farm palisades seem a lot less desirable if your village/faction always has competitive hemp Q that you can trade for another factions high Q crops. Hermits and nabs can participate in trade or just offer their highest Q crops as tribute instead of getting harassed.

People would simply be forced to have two bases, one in Region A and one in Region B. "Forced" part may be argued but that would be the optimal strategy.
“Sell a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man how to fish, you ruin a wonderful business opportunity.” -Karl Marx

"Ladygoo murders people in real life and eats their heart to gain their power, but she's all right in my book" -Sabinati

Make sure you use Ring of Brodgar, the most actively maintained Haven and Hearth Wiki.
User avatar
vatas
 
Posts: 2557
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:34 am
Location: Suomi Finland Perkele

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby LunarArchon » Wed Jul 01, 2020 11:20 pm

vatas wrote:
LunarArchon wrote:Maybe some of these issues can be mitigated by removing crop Quality capping and focusing on highly variable regional growth speed and yield.

Example:
Region A has flax that grows in 1-2 days while Region B has flax that takes 6-7. Farmers in A will have plenty of high Q flax while farmers in B will lag behind. The real estate in Region A would be valuable but this is mitigated by Region A having other crops that take 9 days to grow.

Players get to grow any high Q crops that they have either traded or cultivated. Trade is encouraged but not required as long as you are patient / can deal with slow Q growth. Random farm palisades seem a lot less desirable if your village/faction always has competitive hemp Q that you can trade for another factions high Q crops. Hermits and nabs can participate in trade or just offer their highest Q crops as tribute instead of getting harassed.

People would simply be forced to have two bases, one in Region A and one in Region B. "Forced" part may be argued but that would be the optimal strategy.


It might be optimal if there were only 2 regions but that was just an example. Imagine it working like spiking node quality except its larger and affects each crop. These regions and numbers are arbitrary and just used for example.
Base 1 might be best for flax and Base 2 might be best for carrots, but are you really going to go all the way to base 12 pretending that you are taking the most optimal path? Forming a working trade relationship with players in region 3-20 makes a lot more sense. Unless you want to sit and bot 12 separate farms...
LunarArchon
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:54 am

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby lwdragon » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:56 am

As Jorb told that Q nodes are higher than q200 and we dont NEED to worry about hitting the cap. Well after 5 months in game we already hitting cap in some regions. Not sure how long this world gonna last, but for sure 5-6 months more as minimum, so what should i do then? Move whole village to another place? Make farms around the world and look for better nodes? Make farmer chars for each farm? Each month trade seeds and be stuck at the same q for that month?
I understand concept Jorb had on the paper, but its not gonna work. Farming was cancer, now its even more cancerous.

Okay if there was made nodes, then, maybe, its time to do other changes also, as like harvesting and planting would be not like one by one, but at least 1 by 3. Then lets take trellises, make them easier to build, like fences, also make them easier to harvest. Make easier to grind quality for hops, grapes and pepper, after each harvest make possible for them to go +/- randomly at least by 1. And etc etc...

I want is that you dont need to spend in farm half day just to do basics there, as current farming system encouraging to use farming bots, so you could enjoy game while bot is running.
LTU
lwdragon
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 2:04 pm

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby AtoB » Thu Jul 02, 2020 11:24 am

Problem of all the whiners here crying about limits is that they are unable to wrap their heads around the insight that endless quality growth brings no fun to the game, but drains it.
AtoB
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 12:38 am

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby DPblH » Thu Jul 02, 2020 4:18 pm

AtoB wrote:Problem of all the whiners here crying about limits is that they are unable to wrap their heads around the insight that endless quality growth brings no fun to the game, but drains it.

So where is unfun? If you are bored with replanting carrots - than simply do not replant them. Now for those who liked playing that way will simply drop the game. This limiting mechanics solves nothing, but harming more.
Give a man a game engine and he delivers a game. Teach a man how to make a game engine and he never delivers anything.
User avatar
DPblH
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:57 pm

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby MagicManICT » Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:26 pm

DPblH wrote: Now for those who liked playing that way will simply drop the game. This limiting mechanics solves nothing, but harming more.

Both choices here are harmful. Lose a few players because "muh numbers can't grow" or lose a few players because "can't compete with autistic number growers." (Let's not even bother addressing the real issue of game stability over time, which is what the purpose of such a change is supposed to address, and why it was argued for in the first place.)

Let me address all the vets that have been around long enough of 2011 when w5 came out. How many people quit over the new LP mechanics? Were you one of those that quit, or did you soldier on through the change and come to accept it? (If the number of posts on the forums indicated the number of players that quit, I'd say 75% of the players at the time "quit the game" over the LP changes.)
K'thulu for President 2020!! Why vote for the lesser evil?

Opinions expressed in this statement are the authors alone and in no way reflect on the game development values of the actual developers.
User avatar
MagicManICT
 
Posts: 17487
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:47 am

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby SnuggleSnail » Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:31 pm

I think it's unfair to say this change solved nothing, because it make automation less useful(still useful) in one area - but, I think the tradeoff of increased tedium required to circumvent these mechanics isn't really worth it. Especially when there is a public flax bot, that while not near perfect, is still pretty good.

I think a better solution would be this. Reduced the power of farming bots a lot, allows quality increase to remain as a catchup mechanic, and adds some content to seasons, kinda. It would also be something nabs could trade, since it wouldn't be something people could reasonably monopolize, and a lucky nab with survival could theoretically get topQ that people would want to buy.

SnuggleSnail wrote:Solution
Revert the uniform quality growth, to a random -/+5, and give each crop a static growth time. More controversially, when dried wild windsown seeds should have a chance to be equal quality to the best crops from the previous season to allow new players to catch up to people who've been botting crops since the start of the world. Additionally, the rate at which crop quality increases being static would be positive, EX: +3 every harvest, instead of +5/-3.
World 12: Snail
World 11: Snail
World 10: Snail
World 7: Snail
User avatar
SnuggleSnail
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:04 pm

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby Apocoreo » Thu Jul 02, 2020 10:20 pm

Why build an entire pali over crop scouting when you could plant a few plants scattered everywhere, checking the local q caps. If they get discovered and harvested before you get back to them, the area's probably too hot. Also see a lot of hermit taking these crops. Maybe everywhere could be guaranteed at least 1-4 high q crops? That would prevent Farmers feeling completely fucking over and quitting. Not a fan of it being a hardcap though, more thinking of softcaps.
User avatar
Apocoreo
 
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:33 pm

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby Lunarius_Haberdash » Fri Jul 03, 2020 12:57 am

lwdragon wrote:Move whole village to another place? Make farms around the world and look for better nodes? Make farmer chars for each farm? Each month trade seeds and be stuck at the same q for that month?


All of this. Yes. Especially the last one.
jorb wrote: I don't want *your* money. You are rude and boring. Go away.

Sevenless wrote: We already know real life has some pretty shitty game mechanics, it's why we're here instead.

Avu wrote: The end is near it has finally come to pass: I agree with Lunarius...
User avatar
Lunarius_Haberdash
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:14 am

Re: Crop quality limits critique.

Postby Apocoreo » Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:13 am

lwdragon wrote:Each month trade seeds and be stuck at the same q for that month?


Actually allies should trade seeds every month anyway.
User avatar
Apocoreo
 
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:33 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Critique & Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest