Testing 204: Atlases++ and Signs++!

[Manabanana]

I’m happy with the direction of these notes, as it looks like we have a patch where things were only added or improved upon.

I’m glad to see that durability was taken into account on the tool front. I have a few concerns about the changes though, particularly for the gem tools:

1. Scalability - Dmg is still the most critical stat for tools, because of the way armor works. It would appear that with the increase in durability and DPS at the same time, this will remove some of the issue on t5, but there will likely still be issues with high armor blocks on t6 (and t6+ and above if we are going there, and if the trend of adding armor to blocks continues).

2. Diamond remains vastly easier to obtain than the other gems, almost 30-50% easier by most accounts. I’m thinking it may still be easier to just use the more plentiful resource to get the highest dmg, and use an inexpensive speed brew (to make up for it being slow). This may change with newer worlds, but with the algorithms used for distribution, like only on shorelines or only on flat areas underwater, PLUS the fact that other gems are spawning in a larger altitude range than diamond (with seemingly the same density), this may continue to be an issue going forward. *

• I should note that I have recently moved to using emerald 3x3, dura, dmg, with a speed brew. The added cost of emerald over diamond is not important when the forging itself makes up 90% of the cost of the tool. So maybe this is unfounded. More testing to come for me.

I will do some trials on the test server with the new tools and see how they play out, so that I’m not just an armchair general here. No matter the results, it’s far better than what existed before, so awesome!

I think the Alas changes are magnificent. As are the changes to gold / silver / titanium, they wll have a solid place in the lineup for the t1-t4 worlds now, and since scaling isn’t really a concern, this is great.

Will reply with more feedback to come.

[nevir]

Ah, can’t sign up for gleam club on the testing server with fake money or otherwise - would it be feasible to grant all testing characters access to it?

[jtanner28]

Brah, I feel your pain. Any wiki this early in the life of any game is going to be like trying to bail water out a sinking ship with a bucket. Good luck and godspeed.

[Takritimous]

Sounds like a very nice buff and bug fix patch!

[nevir]

Preview of the signs, for those that are curious:

nitpick: the gleam module (and sign) feel like they should have their padding reduced a bit - compared to the other signs at least

[Lord-Proteus]

Will the sign still retain the emitting colored text even after your gleam club membership expires?

@james

• Metal and Gleam sign text is emissive.
• Sign text will automatically switch to lighter if the sign tint is too dark.
• Signs within a beacon owned by a Gleam Club members can now have coloured text.

[lucadeltodecso]

yes, the restriction is on adding the colored text only

[Lord-Proteus]

Im assuming you can modify the text while keeping the color after the gleam club expires but cant change the color?

[lucadeltodecso]

I am not 100% sure, but pretty sure you would not be able to edit and keep the colour after the expiry

[nevir]

When editing a sign without gleam club, the hex code I enter is stripped; seems like you’d lose colors if you edit the sign after gleam club expires

[Lord-Proteus]

Thats a bit of a bummer but thanks for the info! @nevir @lucadeltodecso

[nevir]

Seems pretty reasonable - people could game gleam club a bunch with that

[Havok40k]

Gleam signs have transparency? Do they also take on the color of gleam used in creation? I can’t help but notice that all gleam signs have been pink in these images. If they take on the color of the gleam used to craft them, then…

Quite simply, gleam stained glass windows are now viable.

[nevir]

@Havok40k

Gleam signs have transparency? Do they also take on the color of gleam used in creation? I can’t help but notice that all gleam signs have been pink in these images. If they take on the color of the gleam used to craft them, then…

They do! That was just the default color for that world, I think

[Havok40k]

Time to farm some gleam then! Cool blue should make a decent basic window… but I want to experiment with some nice amber shades too.

[Lord-Proteus]

Thats awesome! Didnt even think about that.

[Pseudonym84]

Great work on this one, team. Super excited for those new signs.

@Havok40k

Quite simply, gleam stained glass windows are now viable.

I think at this point they should consider adding window props, as people are already using doors as windows, and with this addition - signs too.

[jrockk321]

This is great but what about titans and action!? And more costumes!

[Wablamo]

Props in general… decorations, more functional blocks! Always down for this kind of stuff!

[nevir]

@Manabanana

Diamond remains vastly easier to obtain than the other gems, almost 30-50% easier by most accounts. I’m thinking it may still be easier to just use the more plentiful resource to get the highest dmg, and use an inexpensive speed brew (to make up for it being slow). This may change with newer worlds, but with the algorithms used for distribution, like only on shorelines or only on flat areas underwater, PLUS the fact that other gems are spawning in a larger altitude range than diamond (with seemingly the same density), this may continue to be an issue going forward. *

Yeah, this seems to be a pretty important point. I wonder if there should also be a pass made against resource density/distribution as part of this patch?

The way the game is set up makes it feel like no gem should be more common than any other type, but in reality we don’t seem to be quite there (lookin’ at you, rubies)

It is hard to understand how much of that is driven from player behavior (we’re biased towards diamonds, and thus will gather more anyway), versus how gems are distributed