Stacked planting restrictions

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Spungwa, Sep 12, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Spungwa

    Spungwa Avatar

    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    1,252
    Trophy Points:
    93
    @Chris

    Happy that you can't grow for profit on stacked planters and pots that have no room to grow or planters being sideways.

    I believe though it is never profitable to grow without watering (please someone tell me if this is incorrect). So would it be better to just stop watering.

    This still allows creativity for people making weird and wonderful deco.

    If you can't plant or harvest, then it will becomes one of those things that newer players can't do, as even if they can make the structure they can't then plant it if you want a wall garden.


    Regards
    Spung
     
  2. that_shawn_guy

    that_shawn_guy Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Location:
    earth... mostly
    Personally, I think the outdoor deco limit takes care of this whole issue.

    Sure, the stacking isn't pretty and takes advantage of some deco quirks. But, I don't see it as breaking the economy in anyway. I'm also going to miss the non-planting deco awesomeness those same quirks are used for.
     
  3. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    2,804
    Likes Received:
    10,875
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    I think its a good way to solve the perceived problem - I'm in agreement with Shawn Guy that the deco limits more or less kept things fair, nobody could plant more plants on a lot of the same size as anyone else, so I don't really think this change was that necessary. The only 'benefit' was in reducing the number of clicks required to manage your estate, because of the cleverness of your layout. The obviously buggy stuff that completely defies physics? Yeah, happy with that going away. Interested to see what people will come up with under the new ruleset.

    But at least with the way its been implemented it wont mess up deco applications of planting something, letting it grow, and then elevating it for example.
     
    Roycestein Kaelstrom likes this.
  4. Arradin

    Arradin Avatar

    Messages:
    1,153
    Likes Received:
    2,171
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    Not true, people could stack much more than intended in a row greenhouse lot, and i will never refer to exploiting as " cleverness " , ever.
     
  5. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    2,804
    Likes Received:
    10,875
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Yeah, which is why I said above, the obviously buggy stuff that defied physics absolutely needed to go. Guess you missed that bit. Planters going 'through' the floor and whatnot is clearly not intended behavior. Stacking planters on blocks to make elevated gardens I have no issue with. If the size of the 'box' is increased to ensure that a plant has room to stick up out of there, even better, it will stop things from looking stupid.

    This is actually another example where players do things to try and optimize/make things more efficient within existing systems. While I don't disagree with Portalarium correcting the issue, the absolute tedium of systems like drawing water, or managing a large agricultural state are triggers that cause players to try and find shortcuts.

    People will talk about realism as the reason for this but then can't really answer when I ask how come the plants don't get wet when it rains. Or how we haven't managed to create even rudimentary sprinkler system. Perhaps the kobolds could assist with engineering something.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2018
  6. Scoffer

    Scoffer Avatar

    Messages:
    903
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    93
    The problem with this sort of thing is knowing if its an exploit or not since we don't know what the intended use is for the item.
    When agriculture first came in you could only place it on the ground. You couldn't place it top of ANYTHING at all.
    Then they removed the restrictions so you could place them on top of something. Logical step from there would be to place it on top of another planting bed no?
    If this wasn't intended behaviour why was the restriction removed?

    Without clarification on "this is allowed, this is not" you cant call people exploiters.
     
  7. Boedy Arc

    Boedy Arc Avatar

    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    incorect you can do with a taxed village 7k each 48h

    without stacking
     
    Roycestein Kaelstrom likes this.
  8. Boedy Arc

    Boedy Arc Avatar

    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    a reason too for leaving game
     
    1 person likes this.
  9. Arradin

    Arradin Avatar

    Messages:
    1,153
    Likes Received:
    2,171
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    @kaeshiva @Scoffer
    You both seem confused about what this exploit fix is actually about. its not about stacking the legit way, using blocks etc. As per the message chris wrote, he say nothing about stacking he say that " it will make sure the plant has room to grow " , so people are "clever" can still stack as they wish to reduce the area of growing.

    The bug is about being able to stack planting beds and pots directly on top of eachother using not intended game mechanics.

    This is just Wrong, Sorry.

    Go to a lot right now and try to place two planting beds directly ontop of eachother. Result = cant be done = NOT INTENDED

    Using bugs and tricks to go around what is NOT INTENDED in order to be able to place planting beds directly ontop of eachother anyway = EXPLOITING.

    Very very VERY simple.
     
  10. Scoffer

    Scoffer Avatar

    Messages:
    903
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    93
    This is also not true. In certain biomes you can absolutely place one on top of another. I personally couldn't understand why someone else was having trouble with it when it was as simple as just putting it there. I went over to the town they were trying it in and they couldn't do it. In the town I was in I COULD do it. I assumed everything was the same and so since i could do it in the town i live in, everywhere could do it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2018
  11. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    2,804
    Likes Received:
    10,875
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    I'm not confused at all. Read my post again. I even specifically express an interest in seeing what people come up with using "legit" clever planning. I'll say it a 3rd time: I'm in complete agreement that the sideways crap looked stupid, and that plants shouldn't be able to "grow" through granite blocks or other planters. It was dumb. I don't have an issue doing it for deco purposes, but agree with the fix to make these items non-functional in this configuration. You keep quoting me to argue but I'm actually saying the same thing you are.


    Its actually not as simple as you think.

    There exists in the game a certain physics applicable to granite blocks and other deco. This physics systems has rules that all objects abide by.
    At the beginning of persistence, the planters and even the single plant pots had the "rule" that they could only be placed on the ground or on items that had the ground only rule, i.e. you could place them on a paver or rug, but you could not elevate them in any way. No planters on granite. No planters on planters. No planters on tables. No. These items could ONLY go on the ground, they had the same deco flag set that most statues/fountains/etc. do. This is why, despite how much you may want to, you CANNOT put a rug on top of a stage, it simply wont work, the rug has a flag on it that designates it as something that can only go on the ground. It can't even go on pavers.

    This was changed a while back, so that since the change, planters could now be placed on top of other things. The ground only-flag was REMOVED on these items. Unless such removal, well over a year ago was not deliberate and never noticed (which I highly doubt), then placing plants on top of "things" is allowable behavior.

    The physics that allows you to place planters on top of planters follows the same rules as any construction with granite blocks. Using a 'planting bed' as a structural object, it follows the same rules.

    Placing a plant pot on a table - fine.
    Making a tiered garden (all plants visible) - fine.
    Putting something on top of that - not fine.

    There's a line being drawn here that is very specific, and should be very obvious/logical - if the plant physically has nowhere to grow, it should not do so. Right?
    However, that is NOT how it was working, or has ever worked, so players - call them opportunists, even - made the most of what is likely, just a big development oversight.

    I think the response by Portalarium here is completely appropriate - sees what opportunists are doing with the current implementation of the system, and change the system accordingly so that such opportunities disappear.

    I don't think its fair to point fingers and call people "exploiters" for simply using the deco physics to optimize their gardens. These physics were not a secret, they are not difficult to reproduce, and there's even been many videos/guides over the last YEAR on the forums and elsewhere explaining these fundamentals. The main point is that the issue is now fixed. Rather than completely change the entire deco system/physics etc. which may or may not even be possible, Chris has implemented a reasonable fix that says if your plants have nowhere to grow, they don't grow. Honestly, that's probably how it should have worked to begin with.

    If we weren't meant to put planters on top of things, why did they change functionality so that we could? Its a reasonable question.

    Are plants meant to grow through solid wood/granite? No, they are not - and it has now been fixed accordingly.

    Scoffer is spot on that physics work slightly differently in different areas. I watched him simply plonk planters on top of planters in blatant violation of the "rules" of such things as I understood them, and was unable to replicate it, but when I went to "his" lot, it worked. After investigation it seems to be that if your lot is on top of "paved" terrain you can do things that you can't do if it is on "grass." We've never been able to get enough data to make any meaningful conclusions about this. But its absolutely true that in some conditions, you can stick a building block right on top of another, and in other situations, you need to build a support structure first. Mysteries of Sota.
     
    Elwyn, Witcheypoo, Rentier and 2 others like this.
  12. Roycestein Kaelstrom

    Roycestein Kaelstrom Avatar

    Messages:
    4,632
    Likes Received:
    10,259
    Trophy Points:
    153
    I confirmed that you have to be in specific biomes to do the stacking. Stacking in the green house is also, but too limited and too much hassle.

    While making the planters not stackable gamewide adding more realistic aspect to the game, but it also suck out a lot of fun from the game loop for players who spend times primarily on agriculture.

    The top priority on game development should be focused on making the game loop fun, so players will be more likely to stick around.
     
  13. Arradin

    Arradin Avatar

    Messages:
    1,153
    Likes Received:
    2,171
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    No... its like the textbook defenition of a *BUG* . But regarding the rest of your post, i appologize, seems i missunderstood you.

    But with that said, i will never ever agree that people should be excused to find bugs to go around game features because its "annoying".

    And regarding @Roycestein Kaelstrom , I would never consider exploiting and abusing game mechanics as "fun". I find it fun to play the game as intended.
     
  14. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    2,804
    Likes Received:
    10,875
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    I agree with everything you've said Royce about the game loop. But I cringe when I see the word realism attached to agriculture.

    Hello, its raining, my plants are not wet. Despite having a reasonable pre-industrial tech era (we have rolling wagons and catapults and basic metallurgy, AIRSHIPS, etc.) we've not managed to come up with some sort of irrigation system and are all watering crops by hand, one bucket full of water at a time. Lets just set aside the realism of carrying thousands of filled buckets, too. Lets throw seasons out the window too. Or people planting a tropical plant like say, bananas, in a town where it is snowy all year long.

    In the game setting realism has to get disregarded to implement functional, fair balanced systems. Its a double-edged sword. While I 100% agree that plants growing through solid rock is not realistic, I think that plants growing in basements with no light whatsoever is equally unrealistic. Plants not getting wet in the rain, as if protected by some sort of magical barrier, is equally unrealistic. People hand-drawing hundreds of buckets of water from a well, and using these a dozen at a time to water their plants, is not realistic. This is not how medieval (or even earlier) farmers behaved. If we wanted realism, then we want a placeable water tower and irrigation pipe/sprinkler system. Turn the nozzle, plants watered, refill resevoir. All well within the technological capabilities of Novia.

    Lets not forget water magic here either - an incredible missed opportunity to add depth to agriculture. Cast rain spell and run around should get the job done.

    Theres dozens of ways the system could be made more realistic - but it would be imbalanced and/or players could end up better or worse off, depending on which aspects of realism are cherry-picked.

    Personally, I will be glad to see the last of the "eyesore farms" - and I think players will still find fun ways to do this for a bit of optimization while still allowing the crops sufficient space. But I completely agree with you in terms of priority. Even the most aggressive "planter architect" is only saving themselves clicks - the upper deco limit of the lot has kept things firmly in check, as it should.
     
    Gorthyn, MANTACO, Witcheypoo and 2 others like this.
  15. Roycestein Kaelstrom

    Roycestein Kaelstrom Avatar

    Messages:
    4,632
    Likes Received:
    10,259
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Fair enough, you can consider what is fun and what is not however you like. That's up to you.

    The fact that there are threads opened up to discuss the frustration about this game behavior being taken away is a sign that people do not see this planter stacking the same way you do.

    What I'm getting at is that there are other things that can be focused on to make the game loop more appealing and providing entertainment to players to spend more time in the game.

    Changing the panter stacking is not one of them. Calling out on players who express concerns and frustration ain't helping either.

    Also, plants don't need their whole vertical-axis open up to the sky to grow as they are not jack beans. To make things right, players should be able to build shelves or some platform that they can place the planters vertically while still leaving enough room for each plant to grow.
     
    Moiseyev Trueden and Arradin like this.
  16. Daxxe Diggler

    Daxxe Diggler Avatar

    Messages:
    2,704
    Likes Received:
    5,738
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Virtue Oasis - Hidden Vale
    As one of those people who have stacked planting pots on columns where the plants don't have room to grow... I am sad but I completely understand the impending change.

    However, I did not think it was an exploit, only a game mechanic that made planting easier even though it didn't make sense. To me, it was not an exploit at all because I did nothing other than place the planting pot on an object that it stuck to. The columns vertical surface allowed them to stick to the side at any height... so that is what I did. I also wouldn't have shared the ability to do this if I thought it was an exploit... I would have reported it to the Devs instead.

    I'll be honest and admit I didn't think the seeding/watering would reach those almost completely covered by other pots, but the skill seemed to ignore that fact.

    I also didn't take advantage of this "feature" either. If I thought it was a game breaking advantage I would have filled up my 2 Town lots, 2 Village lots, and 2 Row lots with nothing but these planting pot columns. But, instead I only set up 4 columns on the side of my one home because the layout was convenient enough for me to plant a few crops once in a while without making a thousand clicks. Yes, agriculture has improved some with the AOE planting skills, but until I found this "feature" I didn't think farming was really worth it. The fact that the AOE skill is actually a sphere and not just a flat circle on the ground meant to me that creative vertical stacking was intended and expected.

    So that said, I hope this impending change does not prevent me from placing pots on the columns. I can live with removing ever other one or something to "give the plant room to grow". That would make more sense and I would think that was the original intention of why I could do this in the first place.
     
  17. Arradin

    Arradin Avatar

    Messages:
    1,153
    Likes Received:
    2,171
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sweden
    ?? This is how it will work! Atleast how i understand it. They only say that the game will make sure that the plants have room to grow, NOTHING about stacking vertically.
     
    Roycestein Kaelstrom likes this.
  18. Roycestein Kaelstrom

    Roycestein Kaelstrom Avatar

    Messages:
    4,632
    Likes Received:
    10,259
    Trophy Points:
    153
    The marketing term is "we make the plants have room to grow". The actual coding change is "prevent the ability for the planters to be stackable for all circumstances".

    I was hoping that they code it so that we can keep arranging stackable planters the "proper way" before they make sure "plants have room to grow". For now, we won't be getting any of these.

    [​IMG]
     
  19. Jigger48

    Jigger48 Avatar

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    3
    i guess sandbox game means nothing in this game really. People have been stacking since forever and there are several posts back in may that showed how to do this and the devs knew about it and had no problem with it then so it only took them 4 months and probably someone complaining before they decided that it was not intended and should be fixed? A sandbox allows you to be creative and do things at least till dev thinks its not good for economy or whatever which most times comes from others complaining saying its an unfair advantage.
    Anyway it is what it is and can live with it i haven't stacked till now to try it out but i do use blocks and planters do not touch etc which i see nothing wrong with and like others have said its deco limit anyway so that should be enough.
    What i would like to see is some advantage to using a real greenhouse since a faster timer is not really that much of an advantage with them if you can't be here to water the plants at those times which is why people plant in basements so they don't have to worry about missing a watering etc. But i have seen real greenhouses doing aquaponics and or hydroponics with stacked and or vertical farming and it is the way of the future and neither of them require you to go water them as they are in water already :) They also use less water then planting in ground over time that is :)
    My 2 cents - they need to give some other advantage to using a greenhouse at least over just at faster timer i think like if no stacking like whats been going on let greenhouses have some sort of watering system built in and maybe have shelves or something that you can plant on to make them hold more or whatever?
     
  20. Spungwa

    Spungwa Avatar

    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    1,252
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think this has got a bit off topic.

    As i said i'm happy with the stacking solution

    I quote

    "While we appreciate the creative ways players are finding to stack planters and beds, doing this makes all players feel like they must also do it to be compete. "

    So the implied design goal is to ensure that stacking is not needed to compete in the agriculture economy.

    With my solution of just blocking watering, i believe the implied design goal is achieved. But you have still allowed the "creative ways players are finding to stack planters and beds" if you only want it for the looks.

    For example if you are using a coconut plant (with a long stem) and completely covering the top with another piece of deco because you want the stem to look like a strut between the planter/pot and the higher deco item, you can still do this. But it is not efficient for growing crops in the agriculture economy. So meets the design goal but does not limited creative deco creations. Or you want some fantasy sideways garden for RP reasons or whatever, still possible.

    So in summary it gives the best of both worlds.


    Spung
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2018
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.