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

[Sunstrike 15]

So lets see.

 

Setup:

With my common frypan and common oven, I've worked out that seafood bangers and mash gives me my desired farming affinity, success!

 

Obviously, I'd like to boost this, and have a longer timer

 

Scenario a) (keep as is). I then buy a rare oven, and then need to test all combinations again to find a new farming affinity, if i get a rare frypan I have to test it all again too!

 

Scenariob ) (change) I can invest in a rare oven and frypan and receive the farming affinity from the same seafood bangers and mash, and the affinity timer is longer.

 

With over 500 recipes, and thousands of potential variations in ingredients, why do we need to cube that with rarity of oven/frypan changing it too? The rarity bonus should be the boost to timer length, nothing else.

[rixk 830]

1 hour ago, Retrograde said:

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.

 

 

Yep, the container rarity is not really necessary either in determining affinity.. A meal should be a sum of all its ingredients, no more. Container/cooker shouldn't change the essence of meal, boosts to length of bonuses are enough.

Edited December 17, 2016 by rixk

[Amadee 1,543]

I still say that those who don't like, or don't want to do, massive experimentation or "work" as they call it, will ultimately do the same thing whether it's changed or not, which is....they will find the affinities they like (with luck also combined with high nutritional value and ccfp, etc), and will stick with that because....well...they don't like or don't want to do massive experimentation.  lol.  Pretty simple.

 

In the meantime, those who do like and/or want to do the experimentation, exploration, or "work" will not have the expanded opportunities if it's changed. Those who don't like it are not obligated in any way to use it, and undoubtedly won't in any case.  But I guess the idea behind that is "I personally have no use for all that so no one else should either."  Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh or snarky but that's just the way I see it.

 

Another thing to consider which may or may not happen, but is certainly possible, is that changing things may introduce some more unforeseen glitches that will then have to be worked out, causing more confusion and "work."  If it ain't broke, why fix it?  The system is functional as-is right now and I, for one, like it the way it is. 

 

p.s.  Also wanted to add that I personally hope to be able to play with, and mess with, this new cooking system for a very long time to come.  I want to be still finding new things.  I see no reason to have such a full and enjoyable system added, only to use it for a month, find what I "need" and then be done with it. 

Edited December 17, 2016 by Amadee

[Becket 843]

This is not hard people if you don't like idea of a different oven (rare/reg) changing the afin use the one you are currently using.

[Stanlee 3,434]

4 hours ago, Retrograde said:

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.

 

 

 

I must have lucked out; I tried 2 meals in a non-rare pan and got the same affinity as with a rare pan.

 

2 hours ago, Amadee said:

I still say that those who don't like, or don't want to do, massive experimentation or "work" as they call it, will ultimately do the same thing whether it's changed or not, which is....they will find the affinities they like (with luck also combined with high nutritional value and ccfp, etc), and will stick with that because....well...they don't like or don't want to do massive experimentation.  lol.  Pretty simple.

 

Stop trying to characterize one side of the argument negatively. I've done loads of experimentation work, think I've done about 300 completed meals in the name of it so far, several of which repetitions to check what changes the affinity and what doesn't. And I originally raised this issue, first thinking it was a bug, then because my experiments were near useless to my non-rare-oven-having friends. If they sampled one of my foods and found an affinity they want, they'd need to use my oven or get themselves a rare one. As I said earlier, and a point that other people have listed, there's enough combinations for Jalfrezi to cover the entire skill list, characteristics too, over 66 times. With rarity, it quickly becomes over 265 times. How much experimentation is enough?

 

Fun thought: rare still. Yeah, enjoy your liquid combining.

 

Powerful compromise: A way to tell what affinity-changing factors went into a meal. Issue is, that sounds like a lot of dev hours, and might harm the recipe sharing system that we totally use and don't just whisper the entire recipe.

[Stormblade 617]

8 minutes ago, Stanlee said:

or get themselves a rare one.

 

Exactly, so whats the issue? 

 

9 minutes ago, Stanlee said:

How much experimentation is enough?

 

When YOU say you're done, no is twisting your arm to do any more work than YOU want to.  If you've found your affinites hey grats to ya cudo's and all that crap, but let the rest of us experiment with rares and non rares as WE want to.

 

10 minutes ago, Stanlee said:

there's enough combinations for Jalfrezi to cover the entire skill list

 

Maybe, but what if ( and i'm almost in this case ) on my main, a non priest half my affinites are crap like, Healing, Prayer, Preaching, Religion hell even found one for Channeling, wtf am I going to do with channeling?!?  But if i'm able to cook that same meal in a rare oven and it flips em to a different affinity, then cool as hell and i'm good to go.  ( on the flip side, my priest got crap like shield lrg, med small, swords, Blacksmithing, Weapon smithing and mealturgy - dah fug he can't even do metalurgy )

 

So again let those that wish to use rares to get different affinities do that, and those that are content with the ones they have then keep them, No one is forcing Anyone to use rares to get different affinites.

 

Omg I use unleaded gas, gets crappy gas mileage but gets me where i'm going, but wait, we have premium and super premium ( or wtf they call it your contries ) but lets force EVERYONE to use the same gas no matter what with 10 percent ethanol that craps out your engine after 100k miles, but hey, least we're all the same and there's not confusion for the lazy that just want a single pump to use.

 

 

[Stanlee 3,434]

There's enough combinations for jalfrezi to get the entire skill list 66 times.

 

Repeat, there's enough combinations for jalfrezi to get the entire skill list 66 times.

 

Without using rarity.

 

You're accusing me of being too lazy to want to vary by rarity, yet somehow you're not able to find the affinity you want in the over 9000 combinations available for one food without even touching rarity.

[Kyleshandra 205]

I would say definitely do not reset all... some people have already invested a lot of time.

For the same reason, I think it should stay as it is... but, since there are so very many variables, when you examine a cooked item, it should tell you what those variables were .. ie: This meal contains bear meat and corn... it bears the marks of having been cooked on a campfire, possibly that is hotter than normal (rare).  This way, at least if I taste a meal to see what it gives me for an affinity, I know how I got there.

Since I haven't tried it yet... cooking in a rare over doesn't automatically make a rare meal, right?  Does a rare cornbread give a different affinity than a regular one?

 

[Reylaark 1,100]

Leave it as is.

 

It is not complicated.

 

For those who find it complicated, don't ever use anything but a plain old oven.  Nothing rare+, ever.  Problem solved.  Pro tip: if it's shiny, don't go cook-y.  Even made it rhyme for yas.

 

The system, as it stands, allows those who feel overwhelmed by the number of variables to limit those variables for themselves.  There is no need to lower the bar for everyone across the board.  Those who like the scope of all the variables can continue to enjoy it. 

 

It's not a race, you don't need to figure out the entire thing by tomorrow.  Allow the system the benefit of longevity it gains by leaving it as is.

 

Again, if you feel you may panic because it's all just too much, take a deep breath and don't use the glowy ones.  You'll be okay, it's totally understandable.  Someday, in the distant future, you may like re-experiencing the joy of exploration by, say, just trying out rare.  Not fantastic or supreme, don't freak out, just maybe try rare for a while in a few years when you're comfortable.

[Stanlee 3,434]

I'm not entirely sure why you'd go for the "don't worry, it can be as simple as you want it" angle.

 

Like, sure, it can.

 

Or we can go with "rare keeps it same as normal, -but- shiny makes the timers longer!"

 

Which seems a whole lot better than trying to belittle people.

 

It's not like I'll run out of recipes any time soon with that over 9000 jalfrezis (this isn't a meme, I did the math on the other thread, there's over 9000 once you start considering you can have fresh crushed spices) without touching rare ovens.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Stanlee

[Reylaark 1,100]

29 minutes ago, Stanlee said:

I'm not entirely sure why you'd go for the "don't worry, it can be as simple as you want it" angle.

 

Like, sure, it can.

 

Or we can go with "rare keeps it same as normal, -but- shiny makes the timers longer!"

 

Which seems a whole lot better than trying to belittle people.

 

It's not like I'll run out of recipes any time soon with that over 9000 jalfrezis (this isn't a meme, I did the math on the other thread, there's over 9000 once you start considering you can have fresh crushed spices) without touching rare ovens.

Yeah, I wasn't nice.

 

I just get really tired of seeing people in games freaking out that something is just so complicated when it really isn't.  I'm sorry if it's complicated for them, but it gets old, and I really don't want to see the ball start rolling.

 

Perhaps you don't like that rare ovens give you a different affinity.  Some people complain that they then have to figure out the whole thing again.

To me, that's a feature.  I like thinking that there is so much longevity to this.  At worst, it really doesn't phase me and I find the notion that it's too complicated just silly.

 

Why is it better to remove how it is now, than just simply don't use the rare if you don't like the outcome?

 

I wasn't really trying to belittle people, there is no try, I was just straight up belittling people because for goodness sakes, how complicated is it to just not use a rare oven if it bothers you?  Not to mention, add another column or two to the spreadsheet to compensate. 

 

I won't complain if they want to change it, but I shouldn't be required to smile while it happens.  I'm annoyed.  This is Wurm.  I perceive this as people with pitch forks wanting to dumb something down and I'm not happy about it.

 

Now to be honest, I'll probably feel bad for not being nice at some point down the road, but I'm just not anywhere near that point yet sooo.... humbug, sir, baaah humbug.

2 hours ago, Kyleshandra said:

when you examine a cooked item, it should tell you what those variables were .. ie: This meal contains bear meat and corn... it bears the marks of having been cooked on a campfire, possibly that is hotter than normal (rare). 

If it gives you all that info for only meals you created, and that helps some folks, sure, why not.

 

However, if I sell someone an insect meal from batch #534, and they really like the affinity they get from it... a chef doesn't just give their technique away.  I'd rather just go back to my notes, look up batch #534 and make the customer more meals.  Or, if the price is right, sell them the recipe+technique.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Reylaark

[Stanlee 3,434]

4 minutes ago, Reylaark said:

Not to mention, add another column or two to the spreadsheet to compensate. 

 

The spreadsheet for Jalfrezi, with rarity, is 7-dimensional.

 

See, you need the rows for meat/veg/fish type, the columns for spice type, pages for vinegar type, entire spreadsheets for the oil type, different google accounts to handle the cooker type, different servers for the container types then finally different planes of existence to hold the rarities.

 

Unless you're some kind of savage that uses multiple variables in the columns.

But even then you've got to contend with multiple spice recipes.

 

It's a strange idea that somehow 9000 jalfrezis isn't enough and really, we need 36000 from including the rarities.

If you make 1000 different Jalfrezis I'll totally concede my point that maybe you do need 36000.

[Reylaark 1,100]

4 minutes ago, Stanlee said:

 

The spreadsheet for Jalfrezi, with rarity, is 7-dimensional.

 

See, you need the rows for meat/veg/fish type, the columns for spice type, pages for vinegar type, entire spreadsheets for the oil type, different google accounts to handle the cooker type, different servers for the container types then finally different planes of existence to hold the rarities.

 

Unless you're some kind of savage that uses multiple variables in the columns.

But even then you've got to contend with multiple spice recipes.

 

It's a strange idea that somehow 9000 jalfrezis isn't enough and really, we need 36000 from including the rarities.

If you make 1000 different Jalfrezis I'll totally concede my point that maybe you do need 36000.

While I very much like your reply, I'm choosing to stomp my foot, cross my arms and remain obstinate.  So, you know, there.

 

1000 Jalfrezis and you'll concede huh?  I'll have to get back to you on that but in the meantime, you may, kinda maybe sorta have a point.

that I might be willing to perceive in my far peripheral vision, for now.

[Stanlee 3,434]

Accidental double post

Edited December 17, 2016 by Stanlee

[Stanlee 3,434]

Now allow me to take that small crack of accepting what I'm saying and jam a crowbar in there to pry it open.

 

You're imping your rare oven. You luck right out, and have a fantastic oven. If we keep as-is, all your recipes would be useless in this, and sure you'd explore again and get some really great timers under the fantastic oven, but you'll have to make that 1000 again to see what they all are.

 

With the change, you'll know what you can make for what, and get silly timers from having a fantastic on your hands.

 

Sure, there's the joy of exploration. But you could get that same joy just from getting another type of vinegar

Edited December 17, 2016 by Stanlee

[Kardiwen 13]

For those who say, we who vote for it to remove the rarity factor for affinity change, that we are the lazy ones. 

Well here is how i see it,  its YOU who is lazy! YOU do not want to explore the recipes, you want to make 10 meals and have them give you what you need, and now that it did not happen, you hope that in rare cooker you will get what you want from those same 10 meals. 

 

We have 140 skills including the characteristics (i counted!) 

My favorite meal to make right now, because of the variables and amazing timer is Stirfry. This one meal (excluding crab,human, dragon, snake and tough meats) and excluding the rarer oils like nutmeg makes 27 000 different stirfrys!  

27 000 / 140 = 192.86 (As in you can go over the skill list 192 times) Are you seriously telling me you will not find your affinity without the rarity in play? This is just one base recipe, there are 500 of them. Without the rare containers and cookers it is around 10 million different ways to cook them.

 

A bit more math, so lets say you have prepared all of the ingredients, cooker lit, container on the go, at best it will take you 2 minutes to make one meal.

27 000 * 2 mins = 54 000 / 60 = 900 hours / 24 = 37.5 days FOR ONE MEAL TYPE, non stop cooking. Triple that for container rarities and triple that one more time for cooker rarities.

Tell me, how many hours per day can you play? Surely you need to sleep/eat maybe work? Maybe 8 hours a day of game time? 900 hours / 8 = 112.5 days

this is if the rarities do not change the resulting affinity... Tell me again how you want to play with the cooking update more than a few days. It will take a lifetime for you to explore all the recipes with the rarities in effect. You will be sick of cooking before the options run out without the rarities affecting the affinity you get.

You will suicide trying to get em all with rarities in effect.

[MrGARY 12,421]

11 hours ago, Retrograde said:

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

 

are you trying to say that it will become like this, or what?  because using rare or supreme frying pan for me gives the same affinity?

 

and to everyone saying "lol we don't need more complexity because we can make the same meal 56,222.4 times!!!!!!!!!"   um, you know how many skills are in the game right?  you're bound to hit all of them before spending a month cooking so i don't really get why someone would have to make every last variant unless they enjoy wasting time?   putting "simpler" meals into different cookers giving different affinities makes it easier to get affinities in all/most skills.  Then when you ignore the 50,000 combo food that gives a crappy 20m affinity from a bite and go towards something like rum from a troll that gives a 3 hour affinity, your only option to vary is oven or campfire.  Rarity of cooker means you can get more affinities from this super drink.  It'd actually make me want to try to get a supreme oven as I already have rare and normal

[Stanlee 3,434]

6 minutes ago, MrGARY said:

you're bound to hit all of them before spending a month cooking

 

Actually, due to the Coupon Collector's Problem, you do actually need quite a lot of them in order to populate the whole list (you have a 1/140 chance on every meal to get the last one you need, once you get the other 139!). That'd be a serious month of dedication.

 

The excess argument is more to do with the number of existing things you can change to get a good recipe giving what you need (such as my choice one, Jalfrezi, which is 40 mins per bite) than any form of desire to make every variation.

 

So once we strip away your misunderstanding of an argument, we're left with... your desire to increase your chance to get a good affinity, from one select limited (dare I say cherry-picked) recipe, when there's plenty of non-limited recipes with good timers, at the cost of other concerns (availability in sharing recipes, for example).

[Reylaark 1,100]

3 hours ago, Stanlee said:

Now allow me to take that small crack of accepting what I'm saying and jam a crowbar in there to pry it open.

 

Yeah... this is the trouble with using water to temper our crowbars instead of oil, they wind up really brittle.

 

I just don't believe all the recipes I developed cooking in a rare oven are suddenly useless because I've acquired a fantastic or supreme oven.  Those recipes from the rare oven are still perfectly useful with every rare oven I come across.

 

If I only had a rare oven, and chose to imp that oven to supreme,

1. I'm really lucky to have had a rare oven, and now scored a supreme!  Clearly the gods love me.
2. Making changes to the only oven I have recipes for knowing full well what the consequences will be to my recipes was a rather dumb move.  Woops, *facepalm*

You're a good fellow, I hate to say you're wrong.  You're just a bit shy of right

Who knows though, I'm sure there's Russian hackers living in North Korea smoking big tobacco cigarettes hatching a plan to turn this vote around!

 

[rixk 830]

4 hours ago, Reylaark said:

1. I'm really lucky to have had a rare oven, and now scored a supreme!  Clearly the gods love me.
2. Making changes to the only oven I have recipes for knowing full well what the consequences will be to my recipes was a rather dumb move.  Woops, *facepalm*

 

And this make current affinity system the only in wurm, which punishes you for striving for better. Whole new attitude in Wurm: whatever you do, just don't touch that rare oven as it might go supreme and you will be rewarded with reset to all of your work, so you have to start all over with your database.

 

[Wurmhole 3,650]

I just have to believe 90% of the people that want to keep the rare factor in play for affinities are ones that just spent a week learning recipes with rare cookers.  If you consider the time spent over this last week and the amount of time you will potentially save by reducing the number of combinations you might need to learn, eliminating the rare factor is in your best interests and this last week of learning is completely insignificant in comparison.

 

Truth is, all work being done now or in the future has a chance of being wiped out over and over again, as long as the RNG is part of the discovery process.  One more tiny glitch and poof, all your notes are worthless, so don't fret over what you have learned since the cooking update. (Wurmhole stands ready with fire extinguisher in hand)...

[faty 423]

I initially started by voting (a), to keep the system. Main reason being the variation it adds and that with only a few recipes you have 4 times more chances to get the affinity you want.

I've done little cooking, I found a few affinities that way but I also managed to find a lot of them by having an agreement with an alliance member to let me taste the food she cooks once in a while.

Also at public events I try to taste all the available free meals to sniff for affinities. 

 

And now, in light of this new information I realised that some of it might be for nothing, because besides the ingredients now I also have to know the cooker, and if I eventually find that elusive WS affinity and it's made in a fantastic oven.. I will be screwed. I didn't have all the information before, I thought the 500+ recipes means 500+ different affinity results, but now as I find out there are 27k+ variations with only one recipe, that is just nuts to multiply it by 4 for just one recipe. 

So I'm switching to (b).. as I realise that the cooker rarity just adds an unnecessary extra layer of complexity. .

 

[Reylaark 1,100]

8 hours ago, rixk said:

And this make current affinity system the only in wurm, which punishes you for striving for better. Whole new attitude in Wurm: whatever you do, just don't touch that rare oven as it might go supreme and you will be rewarded with reset to all of your work, so you have to start all over with your database.

 

If it goes supreme, you are rewarded by having a supreme.  It does not reset all of your work.  Your recipes for a rare heat-source remain just as viable as they always were.  The option you want them to implement is the one that resets all recipes for everything but plain.

The database you have created using a rare oven stands as good as it ever was.  You can duplicate the database for supreme and update the affinity field as you go.  Or you can amend your database to add an oven table and account for 4 variants.

 

In the meantime, strive for a second rare forge before you strive for a supreme

7 hours ago, Wurmhole said:

I just have to believe 90% of the people that want to keep the rare factor in play for affinities are ones that just spent a week learning recipes with rare cookers.  If you consider the time spent over this last week and the amount of time you will potentially save by reducing the number of combinations you might need to learn, eliminating the rare factor is in your best interests and this last week of learning is completely insignificant in comparison.

By the same token, one might assume all the people who want to remove the rare factor in play for affinities just imped their rare to supreme and now regret not having realized what would happen.  I don't believe that's the case though, I believe people can think beyond their immediate concerns.

 

Comes down to a different focus on how to enjoy Wurm.  I don't want to reduce the number of combinations.  I like the number of combinations.  I want to keep the number of combinations.

I will likely never use them all, but only because I'm not getting any younger and I'll die before exhausting this wonderful system over the next 20 years.  This is why I play Wurm, and not something I can bang out asap.

 

If your concern is saving time, let's talk about timers.  Actually playing the game itself isn't a chore I want to minimize. 

5 hours ago, faty said:

I initially started by voting (a), to keep the system. Main reason being the variation it adds and that with only a few recipes you have 4 times more chances to get the affinity you want.

I've done little cooking, I found a few affinities that way but I also managed to find a lot of them by having an agreement with an alliance member to let me taste the food she cooks once in a while.

Also at public events I try to taste all the available free meals to sniff for affinities. 

 

And now, in light of this new information I realised that some of it might be for nothing, because besides the ingredients now I also have to know the cooker, and if I eventually find that elusive WS affinity and it's made in a fantastic oven.. I will be screwed. I didn't have all the information before, I thought the 500+ recipes means 500+ different affinity results, but now as I find out there are 27k+ variations with only one recipe, that is just nuts to multiply it by 4 for just one recipe. 

So I'm switching to (b).. as I realise that the cooker rarity just adds an unnecessary extra layer of complexity. .

 

There's a benefit to increasing the mystery behind recipes.  It's great that you've found creative and team oriented ways to address your search for affinities.  I think that is so much better than proposing we cut down the number of affinities because someone wants them all this week-end.  Kudos.

 

If you find a recipe that is for a fantastic oven, you are not screwed.  It does not mean the affinity exists only on a fantastic oven for you.  You have found 1 option, and the chase for your optimal option continues!  Woohoo!  More game playing.

 

The "complexity" is not necessary... They could have left cooking as it always was, and just thrown in affinities.

Some people would have loved that.

I'm glad they chose to go the extra 1000 miles and give us such a great system that will last a very long time. 

 

World of Warcraft had a simple crafting system.  I loved playing that game back in the day but always wished it had more depth to the crafting.  Imagine my sheer joy at finding Wurm, and now at how they've implemented cooking.  The system itself is delicious!  It exemplifies everything I love about this game.  I hope they don't change it.

[Kardiwen 13]

14 hours ago, MrGARY said:

 

Then when you ignore the 50,000 combo food that gives a crappy 20m affinity from a bite and go towards something like rum from a troll that gives a 3 hour affinity, your only option to vary is oven or campfire.  

 

Stir fry (the one i have been blabbering about, that has 27k varieties or more) gives 1 hour affinity from a bite at 40ql  and that is only adding vegs and one type of meat, if you add herb and mushroom you get 1,5 hours at 40ql, in a rare oven it would be longer, with higher hfc skill also longer, and it cooks immediately, you wont run out of a batch and then have to forage to make coconuts or wait for it to ferment etc. Pm me for recipe  I'll share  

[Amadee 1,543]

11 minutes ago, Reylaark said:

This is why I play Wurm, and not something I can bang out asap.

 

11 minutes ago, Reylaark said:

I think that is so much better than proposing we cut down the number of affinities because someone wants them all this week-end. 

 

12 minutes ago, Reylaark said:

The "complexity" is not necessary... They could have left cooking as it always was, and just thrown in affinities.

Some people would have loved that.

I'm glad they chose to go the extra 1000 miles and give us such a great system that will last a very long time. 

 

These few sentences really get down to the heart of the matter, imo.  It often takes me many paragraphs to try and say what others are able to say in a few sentences.