Game Development: Stalking Garden

[Colin500]

Chanrelles and blueberries were great- UNTIL YOU FUCKING RUINED COOKING.

That may well be true, and we are considering some changes on that theme.

Don't just consider, discuss these with players.

[hed9870]

is everybody crying because they did gardener and now they are mad?

is anybody thinking about how this might actually fix the game and add some real relevant things for new players to do?

In legacy a new person could join the world 1 year in and spend a week foraging for stuff like blueberries and chantrelles, trade them to a major faction that has been developing since day 1 and get some good stuff in return. There are very, very little opportunities for this kind of interaction in the world right now and there is almost zero reason for anybody to forage for ANYTHING after a month of developing.

As harsh as it is to anybody who has spent time doing gardening, this change was 100% necessary.

I have a character with gardener credo, there are many in my village and we will all feel the string, but perhaps a bit of sting is necessary for some productive progress.

No one cares about "this is how legacy was".

Foraging STILL won't matter.

As a new player my goal is always to get to the point that I don't have to go forage anymore. Once I produce enough credos at home I'm no longer wasting time going out 3 times a day to look for them. I don't even bother foraging edibles because the q is usually shit and the foods you can make with them are usually shit. It's not like I'm just sitting around wishing I could just forage forever just for the off chance that some large faction wants those items. This is regressive bullshit for the sake of nothing. How many new players are out there right now?

[KwonChiMin]

We need to be able to make running changes to the world without too much regard for existing investments. We did change a lot in one swoop here, and you don't have to like it, but on objective merits I think the changes are good. Regardless of the economic aspects, chantrelles and blueberries were, for example, always bad candidates for potting.

What are these so called "objective merits"?

[Aceb]

We need to be able to make running changes to the world without too much regard for existing investments. We did change a lot in one swoop here, and you don't have to like it, but on objective merits I think the changes are good. Regardless of the economic aspects, chantrelles and blueberries were, for example, always bad candidates for potting.

I literally gave You idea where Gardnening can be more enjoyable and fun ( viewtopic.php?f=48&t=62507&p=793258&hilit=yellowbell#p793258 ), people were asking for more forageables that could be useful but no, You just went and destroyed whole profession in one swoop and I don't think You're yourself sure of that change, You just BELIEVE it will change something while there is not one voice but many saying that You literally fucked up and You ask us to believe in You.

We need to be able to make running changes to the world without too much regard for existing investments.

Sure, I'm not against it.

We did change a lot in one swoop here, and you don't have to like it, but on objective merits I think the changes are good.

So yeah, basically "believe us" and 0 reaosns as to why. You even throw away whole "economic aspect" of it to trash, so again, You don't provide us any logical reasons, not counting this

chantrelles and blueberries were, for example, always bad candidates for potting.

which gives us only 1 reason "me no likey" and still, no explanation as why. even if bad chantrelles might have some margin usage compared to no usage or accidentally being used by new players.

I ask for reasons, I got none.
How am I suppoused to believe in what You think in this regard?

[detoxing]

I can understand you wanting to change the game for the better, i get that.

My question is why would you remove key features in the game, but not add in the new ones you are working towards?

Why remove things from gardening without before/at the same time implementing the new changes to foraging?

Im fairly new at this game but ive been gaming for a long time, the structure for patches usually include the new changes you want to make to your game before removing staples in other parts.

Just seems like bad planning IMO.

[Aceb]

is everybody crying because they did gardener and now they are mad?

is anybody thinking about how this might actually fix the game and add some real relevant things for new players to do?

In legacy a new person could join the world 1 year in and spend a week foraging for stuff like blueberries and chantrelles, trade them to a major faction that has been developing since day 1 and get some good stuff in return. There are very, very little opportunities for this kind of interaction in the world right now and there is almost zero reason for anybody to forage for ANYTHING after a month of developing.

As harsh as it is to anybody who has spent time doing gardening, this change was 100% necessary.

I have a character with gardener credo, there are many in my village and we will all feel the string, but perhaps a bit of sting is necessary for some productive progress.

go back to your avatar hole, since Your post while tries to be constructive, You can hide it in your hole. You live in legacy without much consideration that hafen and legacy are far way in those terms and there's so much changes that changing one thing impact a lot more.

@edit: and if You think new person can't do the same thing but with different stuff, go away.

[Daaneesh]

Chanrelles and blueberries were great- UNTIL YOU FUCKING RUINED COOKING.

That may well be true, and we are considering some changes on that theme.

Yeah I'm 100% done with this game, it's been gutted and turned horrid, there were a lot of great things about it but you guys thought it would be a good idea to literally ruin everything good about it.
You destroyed every thing I enjoyed about this game to the point where it's unplayable- I seriously hope people stop playing this until you fix what you have made unplayable.

[hed9870]

We need to be able to make running changes to the world without too much regard for existing investments. We did change a lot in one swoop here, and you don't have to like it, but on objective merits I think the changes are good. Regardless of the economic aspects, chantrelles and blueberries were, for example, always bad candidates for potting.

What "objective merits" are you speaking of? Making those items functionally useless except for new-mid players? That's completely subjective. Now I'll just be growing troll mushrooms because I just happen to have them. It's not like I'll be begging people to sell me shit q blueberries. I'll just make other int foods.

[Ardennesss]

Mfw jorbtar don't understand that bluebells and Chantrelles had value in legacy because they actually went into good foods that didn't have good alternatives. We have good alternatives now. People will just make those alternatives.

[Kaios]

The brimstone change is really bad, all you've done is allow someone to build a ram outside of the alarm distance and without the necessity to use brimstone for repairs it will be easy for a group to roll the ram over after each hour cooldown before anyone even realizes what's going on.

This is a terrible idea and I don't know why you keep bending over to make changes for some of these people when you know what they want to do. They want to make players quit the game, they want to destroy entire realms and villages and smash every object and kill every player inside. Now you've given them the opportunity to do that and you nerfed the LP gain on gems ensuring no one will catch up with their stats.

Why do you think this is a good way to go with this game? Will it take the entirety of the player base except for the few people asking for these siege changes to quit playing altogether before you realize how stupid it is to allow people to destroy such a large amount of investment without putting in that same amount of investment in the act of destroying it.