Let us check animal quality again

[Fostik]

Since start of w10 ability to check alive animal quality was removed, to nerf hunting.
At the start of w11 survival was set to hardcap animal quality.
So if we have another nerf for hunting, can we get back ability to check quality?

[MagicManICT]

If we didn't have in game maps to track what spawns where, I might agree as the removal of it wasn't very popular. Tracking what I killed where is too easy now, and is there really a strong use for it more than a few times to find "the right" hunting areas? (I say if it's reimplemented, you only see the quality you'd get from it via your current survival.)

[Headchef]

Unnecessary entirely.

[fierce]

I think the quality of mammoths, whales, bears, giant snails and trolls shouldn't be inspectable for quality. Other than that, adding in quality check again would be fine I think.

[jorb]

Nah

[Enjoyment_2]

It should be a reward for 5th level of strider credo, instead of junky ranged damage noone would use anyway.
Also it would encourage top-hunters to kill only needed game, and won't turn hunting grounds into deadland full of decaying animal leftovers. Both QoL and aesthetic good.
But we got just ''nah''.

[pppp]

It should be a reward for 5th level of strider credo, instead of junky ranged damage noone would use anyway.

More reasons for strider credo to be mandatory.

[Fostik]

If we didn't have in game maps to track what spawns where, I might agree as the removal of it wasn't very popular. Tracking what I killed where is too easy now

Sorry, what was the moment of your life, when you decided that killing hundreds of animals just to check it's quality is okay and fair, well balanced and designed game mechanic? I think it's weird, but somehow all player meta confirmed it.

It should be a reward for 5th level of strider credo, instead of junky ranged damage noone would use anyway.

That's cool idea, like it

[MagicManICT]

Sorry, what was the moment of your life, when you decided that killing hundreds of animals just to check it's quality is okay and fair, well balanced and designed game mechanic? I think it's weird, but somehow all player meta confirmed it.

Because I'm going to roam around looking for animals if I don't like the qualities I've already found. Why wouldn't you kill the bear if you need a bear and don't like the quality of the nodes you've already found? Players already run around randomly killing animals just to get combat actions. I might think the expression of this idea was good if it weren't already countered by that fact.

And how should one even know what the quality of an animal is if you don't kill it first? This isn't the 20th century with veterinary science and strong tranquilizers.

[Enjoyment_2]

Sorry, what was the moment of your life, when you decided that killing hundreds of animals just to check it's quality is okay and fair, well balanced and designed game mechanic? I think it's weird, but somehow all player meta confirmed it.

Because I'm going to roam around looking for animals if I don't like the qualities I've already found. Why wouldn't you kill the bear if you need a bear and don't like the quality of the nodes you've already found? Players already run around randomly killing animals just to get combat actions. I might think the expression of this idea was good if it weren't already countered by that fact.

And how should one even know what the quality of an animal is if you don't kill it first? This isn't the 20th century with veterinary science and strong tranquilizers.

Funny - so you're saying that pro-hunter can't say much of animal while it alive (moving, "speaking", eating) but once it is dead, you can just take one look at it corpse and see the quality of meat and bones? seems like pretty weak arguement.
#dontusewordshitty