devtrackers.gg
Who gave you my quest pitch? :P
Who gave you my quest pitch? :P
I hope we actually get a new city
We won't.
Another city, something like Menaphos or Prif is a massive undertaking and, frankly, there's not really space for such a thing in the game right now (it would need a purpose and that purpose has already been claimed by the other cities).
This will be a quest. It'll be an interesting quest with lots to learn, but no, it won't be a whole new city.
This is actually a really good point. I think we can also set this against the complete drop off in quest releases (https://www.reddit.com/r/runescape/comments/a93vrk/a_look_back_at_how_many_quests_have_been_released/)
So I'm, going to step in here as this isn't actually a lore question. This is a production question and honestly it sits outside of the remit of the lore council to answer. So the on stage answer would not be satisfying.
Ironically the decision previously to not follow the story directly was as a result of player feedback, so we instead went looking at finishing 5th age storylines (Menaphos, which yes isn't finished) and Pieces of Hate, as well as a focus on smaller more comedic quests (Cheesecake, Evil Dave, Back to the Freezer).
As you may have noticed we are moving to a more directed story path. I.e most updates now tie together narratively, rather than every story update being delivered through quests. This will be continuing in future with an internal focus to make sure that as many updates as possible tie into the story in some way.
We always want to do more quests, but the big lavish quests are expensive (time wise) to produce and come at the c...
Read moreBecause you can implement or show of same-sex relationships/marriages in other content just fine. Armadyl is a perfect example. A Quest that has been ingrained into the game for over a decade with lore implying the opposite, isn't the best method.
And speaking into detail, I'd say the fact that changing decade-old code to implement something that is seen as unnecessary is a questionable decision.
I'd say the fact that changing decade-old code to implement something that is seen as unnecessary is a questionable decision.
If it helps ease your fears, this took me all of an hour or so, in my free time and most of it I did a few years ago. Mod Kylar and Mod Jam took some of their own time to polish it up and fix the stuff I'd missed/forgotten recently after I'd forgotten about it in a test stream for a good while. The impact on existing content is pretty negligible.
They are doing this because of people complaining how OP PoF is and how it killed normal farming (tree runs and such) Now that they are nerfing it, people are complaining that it will be useless. They just need to find the happy medium and Mod Shauny is bringing it up in the live QA. They also stated in the blog that none of the numbers were set in stone and they would be changed based on what they felt flowed best with the game. IMO I’m sure they will see these nerfs are far too drastic and will adjust them.
Thank you for this comment, because you are correct. This nerf was made because of repeated requests from players for a nerf. Here is a cursory glance at reddit to demonstrate just a handful of the many posts we've seen about it (and the multiple comments therein):
https://www.reddit.com/r/runescape/comments/asq0is/playerowned_farms_are_to_farming_what_sinkholes/
Read moreI was looking forward to "Farm 2: Morytania Boogaloo".
Raising racing snails, giant snakes, maybe even Nail Beasts...Was.
I too would like to do a Morytania farm with the animals suggested. I was going to try and do it last halloween but unfortunately just didn't have the opportunity/time.
That sounds great. I would love region-specific farms. I want to raise a dinosaur for three real-world years until he’s fully grown and then bait and hunt him for exp.
Fun fact, there's leeway in the code for a growth cycle of 2 years (because I knew someone at some point was going to try and make an animal achievement with an obscenely long lifecycle).
I mean there's no intention to make an animal take that long, but the option is there...
Happy Cake Day darkhearted_raven! Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, and stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think.
Good bot.
Read moreThere's a difference between things that are needed to keep the game healthy, and things that ignore the effects it will have and just outright nuke content into oblivion. That nerfs are rarely popular is no excuse for not having thought things through yet again. When will you realize that this careless attitude from Jagex is causing problems that then don't get fixed because you are stubbornly clinging to the past decisions?
You aren't helping the situation, you are making things worse. And the fact that the news post needed to have the bolded segment in it at all only shows how little effort you put into this entire thing. You did not think things through, and when confronted about it you shield yourself with meaningless statements. "It's being discussed", "it's needed", "players wanted it", "nerfs just aren't popular". None of that holds any meaning whatsoever. If it's anything like in the past, nothing will actually change, it will be pushed out next month, and after ...
Jagex has shown to not listen to feedback, why would this be any different?
We're literally making changes to the proposal based on player feedback as I type this. We're not announcing it til we're certain on the numbers, but the feedback absolutely is being considered and taken on board.
In regards to the communications, we wanted to get this idea out early so we could gather feedback and so we could give players a solid heads up. Hence we decided to do so without the final numbers because those numbers would be formed in large due to player feedback. Clearly this hasn't gone well and we'll reconsider this approach in future.
Breeding is already based on health and happiness, so additional changes need to be considered in order to address the abundance problem.
But it's possible for zygomites to breed while being at 0% health and happiness. Remove that. I honestly didn't know happiness and health are supposed to alter breeding, but maybe that's because my animals are at 100% health and happiness most of the time.
I believe that breeding is only possible at 0% when in the breeding pen (due to the mitigation feature) but I'll double check the non-breeding code. It's certainly possible to make that chance zero if they animal is miserable.
For real! If this isn't the best solution for Stone Spirts and POF Variety, idk what else is.
This is a brilliant suggestion worthy of your consideration.
It is being given the full consideration that it deserves. ;)
Ever since the beginning of pof, there have been a problem with royal dragon breeding. This was "fixed" by making Royal dragons unable to breed any kind of offspring, unless they are in the breeding pen and hit the 5x failure mitigation mechanic.
Are there any plans to fix royal dragon breeding with this nerf?
Royal dragons don't offer any inherent advantage over black dragons in breeding. They are not more likely to sire royal dragon offspring than black dragons. I had fixed the breeding issue in the past, I'll double check to see if there's some underlying issue somewhere.
At first glance the new numbers might balance out well. But i see one huge problem. Mushrooms.
Using current prices of mushrooms (and they WILL rise) it costs 1m gp to grow a zygomite from baby to elder if you plan on maintaining health at 100%.
Either let us use seeds to feed zygomites or add a conversion rate to mushy mush (10 mush/mushroom).
Also, add an upgrade so we can store 10k+ foods in pens
Increasing the storage of pens is tricky currently, but we're investigating. Ideally I would like to be able to store huge amounts of food in a pen to make life easier, but it's not something we can commit to due to the technical hurdles. It is being investigated though.
We're aware of the mushroom issue we have long term solutions in mind, but these obviously won't help immediately so we're discussing the possibilities.
So you're saying rather then POLLING this to the 20,000k in-game players you're all taking the word of 500 dumped redditoes who abused oof for 200m and not going to balance around asking all players their thoughts? f**king sick
Sometimes we have to make decisions that are unpopular to some of the player base in order to keep the game healthy.
The concerns about the current state of the farm have been raised repeatedly by players on reddit, discord, twitter, the forums, twitch and face to face in person with players when they visit the office. I've also seen them raised in game when I am logged in on my choob, repeatedly. Nerfs are rarely popular, but it's clear that the playerbase feel it is needed.
The specific numbers are being discussed and refined (hence the bold lines on the newspost) and we're taking on board the feedback from you guys as part of that discussion.
Ok, so Ravensworn will not have an increased chance to be inherited from Ravensworn parents? Just double checking
Nope. Well ish, there's some weirdness in how ravensworn works that makes this a tricky question to answer.
Just tie xp and breeding to happiness and health and be done with it. If animals aren't fed they won't breed no matter what traits they have. How do you expect people to obtain fish or meat to keep animals fed? Raw fish is already up in prices and sometimes low in supply. At current suggested numbers over 1 million extra raw fish needs to enter the game per week (this is assuming RS3 gets 150k players do PoF per week).
Breeding is already based on health and happiness, so additional changes need to be considered in order to address the abundance problem.
We are discussing the food requirement changes currently.
Are you sure breeding pen will function as normal?
Breeding in all pens takes 5 Times longer.
With the already 5x nerf for non-breeding pens, its a total of 25x nerf. XP rates will drop by 25x due to 25x decrease in supply. From 100% current XP to 4% current XP, and that's not even considering the colossal food nerfs and XP nerfs even with 100% happy/healthy animals.
The breeding pen is completely unchanged, the comment about it taking 5 times longer is an error and is being fixed.
The newposts says:
Breeding in all pens takes 5 Times longer.
wouldn't this apply to the breeding pen?
Nope.
The breeding pen is unaffected. The newspost change there is wrong, I've already fed that back to Shauny to fix.
That's because the XP you get from checking animals did not account for breeding in non-breeding pens. Nerfing both XP and breeding rates is doubling down, and way too strong of a nerf. Not to mention the drastically lower bean rates due to much slower breeding, unlocking PoF upgrades will take a lot longer.
Simply nerfing XP from checking animals was enough to curb how overpowered PoF is. Maybe make it 2x breeding time and 1/2 chance, instead of 5x time and 1/5 chance. What you proposed right now is an overnerf.
Also, while a lot of player feedback was PoF giving out too much farming XP, food consumption was never an issue. Increasing the food consumption this much will simply make some animals unsustainable and essentially become dead content, especially for ironmen. Food consumption rates should not be changed with this nerf IMO.
Maybe make it 2x breeding time and 1/2 chance, instead of 5x time and 1/5 chance.
We're looking at this value, it's not set in stone. We're open to reducing it. We went in quite harsh initially following feedback on this reddit, but the numbers can change.
Can you confirm that 5x less likely and 5x longer are not re-saying the same thing differently? Wouldn’t 5x less likely mean 5x longer on average?
If they are separate and stack, that seems like a bit overkill :p
They are separate and they stack. However these are placeholder versions currently and subject to change based on playtesting. It is intentionally harsh so that it's easier to scale down to a less severe value.
Breeding in non-breeding pens has been repeatedly raised as a problem on this subreddit (a quick search will find you multiple threads stating this) so it clearly needs addressing, however the numbers are not set in stone and we are open to feedback.