Poll: should rarity of cooker/container change affinity of meal?

[Riddic 313]

This poll is worded bad    yes or no would have been fine

 

Misread the change to affinities  

 

"Please note this will ONLY change the affinities for those using rare+ ovens, if you have used a normal oven when cataloguing your affinities, they will not change."

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2016 by Riddic

[Legios 496]

Ilike the idea it keeps people trying new things

[Cerber 103]

i voted no cause right now if you eat a meal that you know give you a certain affinity, if you eat the same meal with the same ingredient that someone else made it might give you a different affinity cause he might have made it in a rare oven or a rare frying pan

and if you imp you oven/cooking container and it turns rare, you can start again from scratch

 

it just adds even more complexity to something that's already complex enough

[Tathar 48]

Since my choice isn't among the options, I guess I'll comment:

 

Instead of changing the affinity given, how about adding an extra affinity for each rarity level?  That way a supreme oven, for instance, can never be a downside compared to lesser ovens.  

Edited December 16, 2016 by Tathar

[Tristanc 570]

Keep in mind if you keep it as it is now, with rarity affecting all recipes cooked on ant oven, if by chance you improve an oven and it randomly becomes rare, all your previous recipes made using that oven will change and have to be redone for results using a rare oven.  Same goes for Supreme.  This would always be the case if option 'a' is chosen.

 

A one-time change (option 'b') that only affects recipes made using a rare (or supreme) oven (option 'b' doesn't change recipes made using normal ovens at all, and it'll just change results of recipes for rare ovens once) not changing again will be alot less trouble.  Option 'No' still lets recipes made using a rare oven give a longer time for the Affinity to last as a bonus for using a rare oven.

 

footnote:

by 'a' I refer to the vote for:  yes (keep current system as is)

by 'b' I refer to the vote for: No (invalidate all current affinities found via rare+ cookers)

 

I'd rather not need a spreadsheet showing different recipe results for each stage of rarity for every single recipe.

 

Edited December 16, 2016 by Tristanc

[Mclovin 2,590]

For me; It's nice to have some rare equipment to get different results. I recently noticed rare chopped corn gave me a different affinity than normal, So that was cool.

I think this is a good thing and keeps different mixes available.

[SmeJack 5,796]

18 hours ago, SmeJack said:

It was bad enough the first time there was a wipe, forgivable yeah accidents happen.

After being apprehensive to begin the process again now you are considering doing it on purpose?

 

Please no change, its not a bad thing to imp an oven rare+ by any means no matter how you look at it there is no loss and simple enough to build a new non rare if you don't want to try new things. If your issue is that you may not have a rare oven at every single one of your deeds that sounds like a first world problem with too many villages, mail is so cheap you can send food and hey you can even carry it with you (even though wrapping seems to actually accelerate the decay process). Leaving it makes things more complicated? Hardly. There is already a multitude of ways to keep in mind for affinity changes, adding 'rare oven' to the list isn't going to suddenly break the camels back.

[Stormblade 617]

Honestly this is just stupid anyways, why is this even being discussed, much like when cooking came out and folks bitched about how much work it was going to be to figure stuff out blah blah blah whine whine whine, hell even I said it was over complicated then.  But we was giving a choice, You can CHOOSE to use the new cooking system, or just keep going with the old style meat n pumpkin meals and not use the new system.

 

Same thing for rares.  YOU have a choice, use them or not use them.

 

For those that wish to use them, then choice A is the right choice.

 

For those that ###### it's to much work to much hassle blah blah blah whine whine whine, screwing over those that wish to have different results with rares, then Choice B is your choice.

 

It's simple, explore new options and put in a lil work with choice A, or be a lazy whiner content with not gaining any benefit from rares and choose option B.

 

No i'm not flaming or whatever, i'm just saying it like it is and from reading others posts.

 

It's a Choice, but by removing the rarity effect on affinities, then you're removing a choice that some would like to take.

 

Btw, someone said creating less work for developers would be to remove the effect.  Hello, the less work for them is leave it like it is, it's working as it is and nothing is wrong with it cept folks don't wanna put in the effort.  As far as cooking on different servers, hey, load up your rare oven take it with you, or I dunno, easy as crap option, use a non rare to cook with, Hellooooo how freakin easy is that?!? ( again Oh but i'm to lazy to work oh but I like my affinities ) ok them make extra food and again, I dunno, Take it freakin with you.

 

Also, I don't own a rare oven, nor a rare forge, sold them a looong time ago, but I would like to find out what new stuff could come up by using them, again MY CHOICE don't take that away from me or others just because you don't want to be bothered with it.

 

 

[Wurmhole 3,650]

Storm, you can already make any kind of affinity, without adding in the rare factor.  That is where this doesn't make sense to have.  Should a rare hammer head and a handle make something different than a hammer?  Won't it just add unneeded confusion to the game?  with 10s of thousands or potentially even 100s of thousands of non rare combinations, how much benefit can adding in the rare multiplier actually have?

[joedobo 1,187]

yes, another way to increase the potential affinity combination for a cooked item is a good thing.

[Stanlee 3,434]

8 hours ago, Stormblade said:

I vote yes.

 

Strange how it seems we just went throu this with fountain pans, those that had fountain pans didn't want the change vs those that wasnted the change that didn't have fountain pans.

 

Haves vs have the nots,

 

One side crying and the other side worried that their time and effect are being negated for no reason.  Bonus reward vs having reward of hard work taken away.

 

This is not a game breaking issue, doesn't exploit any known characteristics of wurm.

 

Hard work should be rewarded, not punished or diminished because lazy folks don't want to put in the time or effort for the reward of having rare+ ovens, pans, forges.

 

With this change you will make having a rare worthless. No i'm not basing my decision on a monetary reason but more of a reason behind the hard work of either getting these items or acquiring  them.

 

Strange, I own a rare oven and indeed have done most of my recipes in my rare oven, yet I'm the person that originally said "dear god no" when I realized this. So the "haves vs have the nots" doesn't quite work.

 

See, I cooked for my friends. They tried my meals, found affinities they wanted, then tried to make the recipes themselves. And they just couldn't replicate it, until we thought "maybe it's the rarity of the oven" and indeed it was.

So my recipes were already made almost completely useless, lest I cook for them every time they need a restock of that affinity food, or they go out of their way to acquire a rare oven..

 

Nor will it make a rare worthless; as mentioned before, rare+ makes the affinity last longer. It's a great boon to the meals cooked in the oven.

[Ostentatio 1,970]

As has been noted by others here, an additional factor in the form of cooker rarity isn't necessary to get loads of potential affinities anyway.

 

For example, we were talking about herbal teas on IRC earlier, and there are at least 320 unique recipes just for simple herbal tea. So many recipes have so many variables that you're pretty much bound to find what you're looking for without this being involved. I could probably figure out every affinity I could ever want just by varying the ingredients of a dagwood sandwich and get the rest from several dozen different potential varieties of flavored liquors. Rarity of the cooker as a potential factor raises problems and is unnecessary.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Ostentatio

[Tathar 48]

Just now, Ostentatio said:

As has been noted by others here, an additional factor in the form of cooker rarity isn't necessary to get loads of potential affinities anyway.

 

For example, we were talking about herbal teas on IRC earlier, and there are at least 320 unique recipes just for simple herbal tea. So many recipes have so many variables that you're pretty much bound to find what you're looking for without this being involved.

But what about my option 3 I mentioned earlier?  

 

[Ostentatio 1,970]

It's interesting but might make rarity on ovens too good, if you ask me.

 

Granted, I also think affinity timers need another across-the-board boost. But that's just me.

[Stanlee 3,434]

Too add onto what Ostentatio said, there's enough ways to cook a Jalfrezi to cover the entire skill list 66 times. Before you even include rarity.

 

And that number might be lowballing; I haven't checked multiple spices, nor different types of vinegar.

Also, checked the "one food's variations give similar skills" theory, held true for my first two tests; scythe and hammer, but my third meal got digging, so that may just have died.

[Wurmhole 3,650]

Would language be better if there were 66 ways to spell each word?  How about 264 ways to spell each word?  I mean, having more options is better, right? I hope devs think about the long term outlook, regardless of the results of this poll.

 

But, as someone said earlier: if you don't like all the complexity, don't bother with it and cook the old way. 

 

I do worry about all the confusion for the next generation of players though...

[joedobo 1,187]

35 minutes ago, Ostentatio said:

As has been noted by others here, an additional factor in the form of cooker rarity isn't necessary to get loads of potential affinities anyway.

 

For example, we were talking about herbal teas on IRC earlier, and there are at least 320 unique recipes just for simple herbal tea. So many recipes have so many variables that you're pretty much bound to find what you're looking for without this being involved. I could probably figure out every affinity I could ever want just by varying the ingredients of a dagwood sandwich and get the rest from several dozen different potential varieties of flavored liquors. Rarity of the cooker as a potential factor raises problems and is unnecessary.

 

More is better. It's fine if in your opinion we have enough. But don't pretend like your opinion somehow invalidates anothers.

 

@wurm

Thankfully the majority of folks see the light here. You asked Wurm, so please do as your customers wish.

[Ostentatio 1,970]

More is better, but there's a significant drawback in this case: Being unable to replicate recipes with a new cooker if you got a rare one you didn't have before, or don't have access to the rare one you have.

[Tathar 48]

That's why I like the idea of giving rare-cooked foods extra affinities, as opposed to changing the affinity given.  You get the best of both options, and rarity actually makes a difference that can't simply be outweighed by a small increase in QL.  

[Aeris 3,750]

3 hours ago, Stormblade said:

Honestly this is just stupid anyways, why is this even being discussed, much like when cooking came out and folks bitched about how much work it was going to be to figure stuff out blah blah blah whine whine whine

[---] For those that ###### it's to much work to much hassle blah blah blah whine whine whine, screwing over those that wish to have different results with rares, then Choice B is your choice.

[---] be a lazy whiner content with not gaining any benefit from rares and choose option B.

[---] No i'm not flaming or whatever, i'm just saying it like it is and from reading others posts.

[---] again Oh but i'm to lazy to work oh but I like my affinities ) ok them make extra food and again, I dunno, Take it freakin with you.

[---] again MY CHOICE don't take that away from me or others just because you don't want to be bothered with it.

 

 

It's clear to see that you're angry, and no matter what you base your opinion on you're entitled to it - But once you calm down I'm sure you'll realize that just "laziness" isn't the sole motivation behind the opinion that differs from yours. And even in the cases where being lazy is the reason it's still a valid one since you log into the game to have fun, not to have to roll up your sleeves to dig into a massive workload.

 

As I have previously stated: Having different rarity statuses affect affinities on cooking furnaces is going to cause continuous confusion and annoyance in the future for both old and experienced players as well as for new and inexperienced ones. Can you perhaps see the validity to the concern that too much of "a good thing" will end up turning into a massive headache because you'd never be able to get your head around what to cook where if you have multiple choices? Or perhaps that there's already a 24 page Google docs documentation of the cooking alone (without any of the recipes) floating around just to make sure people understand it, and that the game's turning into "Meals on Wheels Online" very quickly? The intricate details of the cooking system are what makes it interesting for the people who like cooking ingame, but for the rest of us who are cooking because we have to due to the game mechanics' dependency on sustenance it's really offputting.

 

Also like others have mentioned before me: There are already more than enough recipe variations in order to be able to give you multiple chances at getting the affinity you want. Not to mention the fact that this game has never had food affinities before and yet we have all survived thus far, so it's not like it will do any serious harm to have less ways of finding the optimal one and only meal you'll ever need to cook. I'm sure that you'll find the meal you're looking for eventually anyway and won't ever have to use any of the other meal variations ever again after that.

 

It doesn't sound like this is at all about the fun in cooking, it sounds like it's all about finding that one type of food that invalidates the use of all others by simply increasing the selection group - And I am not willing to vote "yes" in order to accomodate to that reasoning. I know a lot of people are hoping that they'll find an easy-to-make favourite meal with the help of the increased variety that rarity furnaces bring, but to me that argument is based on a wish spawned from a short-sighted point of view. I understand what you want to accomplish, but to me that one ultimate super meal just isn't worth the current amount of added hassle it brings about for everyone.

 

Call me a lazy whiner if you want, but this isn't about me wanting to "take away" your choice from you. It's about me not wanting to have an element of constant frustration and confusion in the game and I am entitled to that opinion and there is no need for temper tantrums. I have no problem neither with you nor with your opinion, but don't try to belittle my opinion by insinuating that my motivation behind it is any less worthy than yours.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Aeris

[Ecrir 887]

5 hours ago, Aeris said:

 

It's about me not wanting to have an element of constant frustration and confusion in the game

 

Yet as someone who voted No myself, I do wonder, is the confusion caused simply by rare cookers resulting in different affinities, or because the interface itself is lacking and doesn't convey enough information to the player? There's no way to tell how exactly a certain food was prepared (including cookers and their rarity) without asking the creator directly, even if you already know the recipe, is there? Would the confusion be greatly reduced if there was for example a right click option on the food when you already know the recipe. And with this right click option then showing you how the recipe was executed for this specific food (thus including which cookers, what rarity they had, etc)?

 

To me it mainly feels like the interface is still lacking when it comes to cooking, it doesn't convey enough information and forces players to keep track of things by hand, and allowing small changes to the game to invalidate their notes.

At the same time there is also no window to give you an automatic in game overview of the different foods you've eaten (including the used ingredients, cookers, rarity, etc) and which affinities they gave you. Yes that wouldn't fit in the cookbook, but why can't there be a dedicated window for it, with proper search options so you can find specific affinities, etc (perhaps limited to foods you know the recipe of). Players are currently resorting to keeping track of this by hand, and then when something in game changes (like with the No option here) their notes are invalidated. If the game remembered everything you've already eaten and automatically constructed a list for you, then couldn't the loss of this information be prevented? Yes the affinities of what you've eaten would still change, but at least the list would still be up to date after that change.

[Biervampyr 97]

As a Wu player who will get just about 60 recipes i prefer option A. 

[Stormblade 617]

3 hours ago, Ecrir said:

To me it mainly feels like the interface is still lacking when it comes to cooking, it doesn't convey enough information and forces players to keep track of things by hand,

 

That to me is the biggest issue.

 

You make a meal gives xyz affinity.  cool.  so you know that meal does that.  then you add 1 veggie, or change the oil type, gives a totally different affinity.  The edit notes is nice and all, but honestly it's crap when compared to just doing it by pen and paper.

 

If you change the meat type so for instance Tough Meal ( meal made with tough meat and veggie ) it just shows, Meal ( meat + veggie ) no matter how many variations it does, again something simple leading to using pen and paper to keep track of.

 

That is what is really needed, and easier way to track all these variations and affinities without having to resort to spreadsheets or pen and paper.

 

[Retrograde 12,013]

Just toi clarify, with this system the rarity of the container also changes the affinity.

 

This means that using a rare frypan gives a different affinity vs using a common or supreme frypan.

 

The major feeling with the dev team is that this does add to quite a lot more complexity and ultimately is not necessary, the boosts from rarity of cookers and containers to affinity timers already provide a bonus to using rare items, without meaning an upgrade involves completely reworking any past collections.

 

 

[McGarnicle 1,463]

I originally voted yes, but after reading all of the arguments, I agree that it adds too much complexity. If there are truely that many different combinations, and adding a spice changes the affinity, then I feel that rarity should not change the affinity as well. My original fear was not being able to find a food that gives me a desired affinity but it seems that is not much of an issue. The poll doesnt allow me to change my vote. If it allowed you to change I wonder how many would after reading the arguments fully like I did.