JagexHusky

I don't believe it would make all that much of a difference at that point whether we did fix it or not.

It's a relatively easy drop to get regardless, most people will have gotten it already and only those who are on second accounts or are playing late will really be affected.

I don't mind either way I suppose, I can run it past the team to see what they think on Monday.

Edit: What gothiclogic said below, it's more of the fact that I added it to the interface correctly as opposed to it being bugged and not working when it should've

Every single drop which was added on launch went through QA testing to ensure that the numbers they saw when defeating a creature had reduced quantity X to X/3. I even self-tested every single instance myself.

GWD had a separate issue in which my debug was actually still doing the X/3 but just wasn't rolling a random( ) check around it to pick a random number and I've already checked every single instance to ensure the random() wasn't missed anywhere else if that makes sense.

So no, I don't believe it is anywhere else unless there's a similar issue to this which I can't remember adding anything else to the interfaces post-release

You appear to be correct and I can do my best to explain why

I've checked the original job for the droprate modifiers and it was never part of the original list at all so it was never modified on launch.

However, while sifting through all of the week 1 feedback I saw a comment asking if it was increased despite not being on the interface I checked a line of code that used my ~modify_droprate proc and went "Oh it actually is increased" and added it to the interface.

Turns out it has that line of code because I centralised modifying droprates so that leagues and DMM use a more generic system which is easy to plug into so it is currently on the list of DMM items which are increased but not the list of Trailblazer items which are not increased.

I hope that makes sense and it also explains why, this was just me stupidly and incorrectly updating text on an interface after week 1 when I shouldn't have. Sorry for the confusion, that was a busy first week of ...

F for the lack of ring.

But Gz on 99!

Hope you enjoyed the content!

Completely understandable and no problem! I'm not trying to make everyone see our way of thinking. Just trying to be transparent and involved because even if we don't make any changes, I might get some good ideas to use for the next one!

That is my personal stance and it's shared by some other employees, and less so by others.

This post was trying to stress that even though I feel that way, in reality there is probably a line between acceptable changes and not acceptable changes and I want to find that line and have discussions with the team about that for the next league so that we can present that to the players clearly before it starts.

Lots of us internally have differing opinions on things and honestly I wouldn't have it any other way

Yeah I completely understand where you're coming from, it's a valid way to feel given the situation and it's something I'd strive to avoid going forward if I could.

It's just really hard to deal with because not everyone in the community agrees and perhaps there is a line we need to find where there are acceptable changes and not acceptable changes. I want to explore this further into the future before the next league

It's less about the dev work and more about "do we really have to change this? or is it just part of the league". For example, not having access to an item because you didn't pick regions which gave it just feels like a natural part of the league rules and part of the planning and that is far more subjective to us changing it at this point.

The issues we did change I've described above and hopefully explained why even if you disagree.

I briefly heard about the mushroom issue yesterday, It seems people are taking it as kicking the mushroom pickers while they are down but that wasn't what we were doing. I don't honestly believe anyone who sees that the mushroom can bypass teleport checks/restrictions such as teleport blocks would expect that to be intended behaviour especially when the relic doesn't have that in it's description.

Also, the things that players are not seeing about the mushroom is not having those standard checks actually causes a lot more poten...

I don't agree with you for a few reasons and I'll try to explain why but we might just end up with agreeing to disagree.

First up, bugs are unfortunate and we do our utmost to catch this stuff before launch but if something is clearly bugged/busted and it is not part of the relic description then we should change it because otherwise players who picked a specific relic will feel cheated because the bugged effect wasn't known to them when they made their relic choice.

Your response to this is saying "to buff the others to match" but that's a really really hard thing to weigh up mid-league and could result in even more drastic changes, so much so that you could end up re-writing an entire tier of relics and upsetting everyone and suddenly everyone is demanding to be allowed to re-choose their relics, it gets very messy at that point. This is why my preferred stance is "relic descriptions are law" as I stated in my post above.

As I said, the biggest issue was t...

Yeah I agree it hand-cuffs us a little bit, as I said though that's my personal opinion that relic descriptions are law but it does have it's downsides.

Another way to go about it is to leave the relic descriptions slightly more open, for example Eternal Jeweller could've said "All jewellery" and then if we missed any we add them later mid-league

The double cast one was an interesting case, we did not intend to be malicious or stealthy about it. The bug was brought to my attention at around 11pm at night and I called another dev with hotfix permissions to get their opinion on whether or not we should change it and they agreed we should since it was very powerful.

It didn't seem necessary to call out a CM just to notify players of it at that time at night so we decided we would do so the following morning. However, upon starting work that morning we had a follow up meeting with more members of the team and decided that due to the backlash we would partially revert the change, we then of course had to wait for that dev work to be done properly and tested (and to ensure we could do that) so that we could communicate accordingly.

All in all, it was addressed within around 12 hours of the hotfix. I still personally disagree with us reverting it but that's why we make decisions as a team. We are never going to be...

It's an interesting idea to release them earlier but honestly it would have to be 2-3 weeks early to make any real difference. Even 2 days earlier it's hard to make significant changes because we aim to have the release in a stable state with no more development work on it for at least a week beforehand sometimes more (unless any major bugs are found)

I've seen a lot of comments talking about contradictions between what we have changed and what we haven't and you guys are absolutely correct, I cannot deny that.

I hope I can shed a little more light on the discussions we've had internally even if it won't really make the players who are unhappy suddenly happy about it, maybe they can understand where we're coming from and why we've made some of the decisions we have made.

So I kind of touched on it in this blog but let's break down some of the things we first changed and why and have a look at community reactions to them. I also want to stress that this is all my own personal perspective on all of this and it doesn't represent everyone on the team even if all of the decisions made below were made as a team.

• Fluid strikes adjustment so that the damage reduction happens after determining if you die or not. This one was pretty much just an unforeseen bug that allowed players to never die against some...

I spent a couple of days in a modified dps calculator to take into account relic effects then another couple of days testing in the live-game. I was able to get both a 45s Vorkath and a 42s Zulrah with mage (in near-BiS with heart yes). These are possible but mage is weaker for those.

Magic is never the best in a lot of places but it's globally pretty decent in a lot of places and doesn't have that many weaknesses outside of bosses with stupid high magic def like Nightmare

We did change them, we just changed your progress to not be reset when getting a new one. So if you drop a 2 step clue, get another it will still be at 2 steps!

Thanks, this made me laugh more than it should've haha

Just tweeted it a moment ago! https://twitter.com/JagexHusky/status/1329849292819996672

https://twitter.com/JagexHusky/status/1329849292819996672

I just tweeted the cost list if that helps. We missed them this week but we should have the tier placings next week!

Nope, it means Wilderness d boots are unlocked for everyone since it says all sources

That is a correct interpretation. All sources of the visage are buffed this League