Recommended Posts

Tree & Plant Traits



Trees have several variables each

Size, Bounty, Quality, Foliage.

These range from 1-5.  Default is 2 (as in 3,3,3,3 would give the current trees)


Size affects the size of the trunk (50%, 75%, 100%, 125%, 150%) and also the amount of lumber each stage gives (25/50% more or 25/50% less)

Foliage is a visual effect (leaf cover) and determines growth speed (50%, 75%, 100%, 125%, 150%).

Bounty determines how quickly harvest item regen during season (0%, 50%, 100%, 150%, 200%)

Quality determines the maximum QL for the wood in the trees (20,40,60,80,100)


Since both growth and foliage affects appearance each tree type will have 25 models per growth stage rather than just 1.  A lot more assets, but some might well just be enlarged kinds of others.

Rare saplings automatically have a random stat set to 5, supreme and superior scale accordingly.

 

 

Forestry Changes :

 

 

When harvesting a sapling the maximum sum of the values is ((forestry+14)/3 rounded down).

The values are inherited from the tree the saplings are harvested from (with slight randomisation (+/-1 range).

A forester examining a sapling/tree can see the size (skill 20), quality (skill 30), bounty (skill 40) and foliage (skill 50).

A forester can combine 2 saplings for the same type with the aim of improving one value type (improve for size for example).  The % chance this works is based on the consumed sapling's (the one activated to combine) value for the stat targetted and the QL of both saplings.  The MAXIMUM a value can be improved to is (forestry/20) + 1.  So to make a 5,5,5,5 tree using this you would need forestry 80.  To maintain such a tree and collect saplings of a similar quality you'd need a forestry of about 42 and a bit of luck.

This should add depth and variety to forests, even if they only use a couple of kinds of tree.



Edit : I just realised something would need to be in place for BSBed sprouts.  A rather contraversial option is for sprouts in a BSB to just have random values between 1 and 2.  This means that if you want to keep the QL of your trees up, plant em!

Edited by Etherdrifter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 to all except limiting the ql.

It's already a pain in the (butt) to raise woodcutting to 90, - LOT more then mining which is the closest skill to compare it to. No need to make things more tedious in that area.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This actually sounds great in theory, but I am not sure about implementation.. thing is while trees already have QL.. most of them have max QL. Changing this will make a problem on getting high ql resources for many things from high ql planks, ship building mats, to charcoal piles.


Edited by rosedragon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually RNG wise you have a 1/5 chance of getting a high QL tree in the wild and it would take 5 generations to make a high QL tree (slow growth, no fruit, lower amount of wood) for a reasonably skilled forester.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1


I like the quality idea but at the same time I dont as I like having high quality wood.


 


Either way I say add it.


Very well thought out by the way.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One surefire way to get a game developer to ignore your idea; tell them they'll need to multiply their graphics by 25.

Sincerely, a game developer who's been told to multiply graphics before and knows how incredibly easy it is to ignore such a request.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One surefire way to get a game developer to ignore your idea; tell them they'll need to multiply their graphics by 25.

Sincerely, a game developer who's been told to multiply graphics before and knows how incredibly easy it is to ignore such a request.

Remind me never to hire you ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making new graphics for new content is one thing, multiplying graphics for a relatively insignificant feature is asking way too much.

Honestly, if the Wurm devs did undertake your idea, I would completely lose faith in the future of their game. Not because the idea itself is bad, but the resources wasted on it compared to the reward is astronomical.

There are currently 14 trees in Wurm. I'm not sure how many growth stages have their own graphics, but I'll guess low and say 4. Although it seems the two lowest growth stages don't have winter graphics (yet), the later ones do, that adds 2 more per tree. Now to implement your idea, we multiply by 25. From 84 graphics we jump to 2100!

Not even if you vowed to never hire me would I take on such a burden and I expect, and even hope, the Wurm devs wouldn't either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 tree types, 3 key stages (saplings, young, mature/old/veryold/overaged), 3 seasonal variants for each key stage.

This gives us 126 art assets.

Something worth borrowing might be the size increase used in mature/old/veryold/overaged (ergo add in 4 extra growth stages (mature-1, mature-2,overaged+1.overaged+2) which are just contractions/enlargements of existing models.  The trait just adjusts the graphic used by a rather simple formula.

So now we STILL have 126 assets, just a larger multiplyer array.

The bloom factor is a rather simple conversion, in that you are just removing leaves or adding some.  Considering each of the mature+ growth stages uses the same model you are actually creating 4 new assets for the mature state so you end up with : 

3*2*14 (the young/sapling models) + 3*5*14 (the new mature models + the old ones) = 84 + 210 = 294 which is 233.3% more art assets for trees.

Most certainly NOT anywhere close to 2100.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think your estimates are accurate, but the exact number isn't even that important, so I'm not going to bother debating it. The point is, even by your conservative calculation, increasing the graphics by 233.3% is still highly excessive.

If you want a game developer to listen to your idea, multiplying graphics by even 1.5 is extreme. If there needs to be more than 10 new graphics, you might as well toss your idea out the window, because the odds of them taking you seriously already went there.

To be blunt, if the word 'multiply' precedes the word 'graphics' in your idea, it will probably flip the off switch in the devs' brains and everything else you have to say is irrelevant.

Edited by Nmenth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this