Legacy talk:Wild Windsown Weed

Stuff

• WWW found with perc*expl=80, Image, By JustOneAsbesto(6 Mar 2011)

• It seems that it spawns more rarely in coniferous forest than to grassland and heath. By Trepach(22 Nov 2011) {verify}

• Drying on a frame has no effect on the quality. {verify}
• Drying on an herbalist table halves the quality. {verify}

(Note: I think that (true) verification involves a bit more than just showing one single case (or case-set) that fits the current target.) --.MvGulik. 15:01, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

Additional open investigations:

• Is there a random component in WWW to seed quality?
• Does the table quality affect the resulting seed's quality? (if yes, how)
• Does the forager or person who placed the weed on the table affect the resulting seed's quality?

Data Collection Table

-- Wild Windsown Weed --

case	www_q	Frm	Sur	DF	HTq	(id2)	HTq-Frm	Seed_q	Remarks, Signature
1	22	?	-	N	?	1	?	11	--Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
2	12	?	-	N	?	1	?	10	--Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
3	26	?	-	N	?	1	?	19	--Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
4	24	?	-	N	?	1	?	15	--Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
5	24	?	-	N	?	1	?	13	--Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
6	28	?	-	N	?	1	?	13	--Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
7	25	?	-	Y	N	2	?	11	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
8	25	?	-	Y	N	2	?	19	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
9	36	?	-	Y	N	2	?	22	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
10	29	?	-	Y	N	2	?	12	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
11	31	?	-	Y	N	3	?	16	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
12	31	?	-	Y	N	3	?	30	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
13	35	?	-	Y	N	3	?	14	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
14	33	?	-	Y	N	4	?	27	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src
15	34	?	-	Y	N	4	?	21	--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT), Src

Info:
* case: Case/record id(number) for discussion purposes. (ones used numbers should not be reused.)
* www_q: Wild Windsown Weed quality
* Frm: The Farming level of the character that picked the WWW.
* Sur: Optional! The Survival level of the character that  picked the WWW.
  Just in case the Dev's left_in/added some odd behavior.)
* DF: Drying Frame, Y,N. (Optional! part: Although the general concession is that drying frame either: 
  don't have any quality, Or that there quality don't matters.
  If the DR-quality is tracked, drop in the q-total of the branches. (-1 being the alternative for "N".)
* HTq: Herbalist Table quality. ("-1" or "N" in case a drying frame was used)
* (id2): Optional! Id(number) to identify the same used DR or HT. "-" if not used.
* HTq-Frm: Farming level of the character putting the WWW on/in the Table.
* Seed_q: The final seed quality after drying.
* Remarks, Signature: For optional concise remarks/links/etc. Signature for easy source and history tracking.
(DR and HTq are mutually exclusive)
(None optional fields are deemed critical in trying in figure out what's up.)

Location or Rarity?

Having a hell of a time trying to get carrot seeds out of these things. I think that I've gotten most of my WWWs from the forest and only a few from grasslands and moors. I haven't encountered the heath terrain in my location. I haven't got beetroot as well as that is also another somewhat important crop. The seeds most common were Wheat and Flax. I also have gotten seeds for onions, peas, grapes, hemp, tea, tobacco, and the useless peppercorns and hop cones.(page for tobacco crop sucks) Perhaps the thing about different WWWs could be more specific. Or carrot seeds are really really rare.--Deadguy60 13:39, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

I think it's just random. Last world i had zero peppercorns for over 50 WWWs and this world i had to give up with poppies also after about 50 WWWs and both times i did harvest all over. --Rook 14:07, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

Seems there is still some uncertainty on the subject. --MvGulik 15:24, 2 April 2012 (EDT)
- Re: Carrots

So I guess seeds given by WWWs are more like fish and differ from area to area and the seeds given are not affected by terrain type(?). It's a bloody pain as I guess the seeds given from WWWs don't change like fish where you could use different bait lures or fish with a different moon. Testing was done with WWWs found in forests and WWWs found in moors? --Deadguy60 18:54, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

I don't know how it was tested. There might still be some random aspect to it. But there definitely seems to be a local preset in play. Ground type so far don't seems to matter. --MvGulik 02:19, 3 April 2012 (EDT)

Quality

I don't even think that the quality of a WWW affects the quality of the seed you get out of it on a drying rack or table. Perhaps verification is needed. --Deadguy60 23:23, 23 May 2012 (EDT)

?, "Drying on a frame has no effect on quality." --MvGulik 05:14, 24 May 2012 (EDT)

Eh? Anyway, I'd like someone to test this and return with results. I'm not convinced. The quality of WWW and the quality of the seeds created seems random to me. I could believe somewhat that a table could cap somehow the quality of the seed. --Deadguy60 07:36, 24 May 2012 (EDT)

Someone? ... Please, finding WWW is not that hard. This is definite something you can do yourself.

In addition. Why do you question 'that drying racks do not effect final seed quality.' (as that's what I read in your text."?) I mean here, what data do you have that makes you think its not correct. Just saying that you are questioning something, whiteout giving any additional reasons/data, is no very useful or clear. --MvGulik 09:23, 24 May 2012 (EDT)

I think hes right, a good quality herbalist table gives you seeds higher than the WWW and usually on a frame I get lower quality seeds. guess since we have a new world its a good time to test this. I'll be making notes of all WWW I collect and what quality they are before and after frames and when I can I'll test a few different quality tables.ImAwesome

To bring this back up, I can confirm that drying on a rack will cut the quality of the WWW in half. I am unsure on quality related to herbalist table at this time but may experiment further in that area.

Smurfsrule

I think I can say this is probably untrue, I think I got a ~33 peapod from a ~50ql WWW on a drying rack. --Deadguy60 (talk) 11:50, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

Quality of the Resulting Seed

The quality of the seed received from a dried Weed is apparently random but it seems that the quality of the herbalist table may cap its quality, perhaps even innately halving it. Drying on a rack doesn't seem to have a sort of cap but the quality of the seed from a dried weed is never higher than the quality of the Weed itself. Higher quality weeds, though, may turn into a higher quality seed than a seed from a lower quality weed. --Deadguy60 (3 Sep 2013)

Deadguy60. You probably mean well, But I strongly suggest you start putting in some effort showing that what you post (on main pages) is backed up by some test data. (+notes on main page should be concise.) --.MvGulik. 04:32, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

It seems definitely random, if I must post test data, I'd like to see the test data/source on the information already provided. I simply posted a general observation and I attempted to be vague enough so that other people can update the page whenever more concrete data is found. The information about quality of the resulting seed on this page makes it sound like the you can calculate it but, nowhere in the information provided tells you some of the details of the information that I have tried to add. Information such as the randomness and the quality cap of the seed. And I do think that I may have added information that I should have posted to the talk page first but I didn't want to bother with the following discussion. --Deadguy60 (talk) 11:21, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

Other bits of possibly useful data then. The trouble of collecting data is that people quickly start ignoring WWWs when they have the seeds for all the major crops. I was hoping this info would help prove point that there is still some utility in WWWs at this point. Once a person has found higher quality soil, they may find higher quality WWWs which may turn into higher quality seeds than what they already possess. Finding higher quality WWWs may be an alternative to raising the quality of crops by selective growing, especially the quality of pumpkins and crops a player doesn't grow regularly. I haven't personally observed seeing a higher quality seed resulting from a lower quality WWW. --Deadguy60 (talk) 11:46, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

Bah, nvm what i posted here originally, seems every one of us was getting different results on seed quality, that's why i agree with MV, a real test data is needed --Rook (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

I'll just post some results then. From two WWWs that I'm pretty certain were 40ql+, got 38 ql onion and 18 ql flax seeds from drying them on a rack. I partially believe that farming has an effect on the quality and for some reason possibly even the nature belief, but perhaps not likely. The bit of how the table quality may affect the quality of the resulting seeds might be a significant part of my information that I've been imagining. Table quality apparently affects the quality of everything else and so I have doubts of it simply halving the quality of the seed as this page currently says. --Deadguy60 (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2013 (EDT)

I'm about to tug myself in for the night, well ... trying. Oops, its already getting light outside. Anyway. "The systematic, careful collection of measurements or counts of relevant quantities is often the critical difference between pseudo-sciences, such as alchemy, and science, such as chemistry or biology." Source: wikipedia:Scientific_method.
Maybes, Pretty sure's, or other not directly logged and written down observations are fine for forming hypothesis(ideas) about what might or might not be. But that's where they will stay(on the talk pages) without some serious HnH observations time and data recording effort(s).
--.MvGulik. 00:07, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

Make what you will from this. --Deadguy60 (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

Now this is perfect :) , could you add (in case any of it influences results) table QL, farming of character that picked WWWs and farming of character that put them on the table, if different (and anything else you think might play a role) --Rook (talk) 07:50, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

What Rook said. +Renamed your images with more descriptive names. --.MvGulik. 10:54, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

Um, someone get rid of the apparently incorrect information about the halving in quality. These seem to be the questions we are to answer:

• Is the quality of the resulting seed random?
• Does the table quality affect the resulting seed's quality?
• Does the forager or person who placed the weed on the table affect the resulting seed's quality?
• Is there any relation to the quality of the WWW to the resulting seed?

I can't be bothered to guesstimate the quality of my tables. Lets say it was made with 20-25 ql fibers, 31 ql boards, 10 ql blocks. Three characters were involved, a non-forager with 39 farming, a forager with 19 farming, and a forager with 1 farming but I can't tell you who foraged what and who put the weeds on the table or racks. Anyway, we all seen seeds from WWWs with single digit quality on racks and maybe tables right? Also the 28 ql weed turned into 13 ql tea seeds. I'm thinking soil quality of the area might have an effect but I live mostly in a cave. "Forage/soil" quality in the cave though seems to be ~22 form my experience on what I foraged there. I'm thinking that there are soil nodes on every tile but sometimes they are overlapped with other resource nodes. --Deadguy60 (talk) 11:32, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

I'll just post this possibility, the table could still half the quality, but do something like +/- 5 to the final quality of the seed and also softcap that.--Deadguy60 (talk) 12:24, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

Added Table for data dumping. Quickly skimming true new messages. "I can't be bothered ..." Erm, not a good sign. *run's of to do some shopping* .. After reading up, I think its better to let Rook answer (If you like of course) --.MvGulik. 14:12, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

--Deadguy60 (talk) 22:28, 4 September 2013 (EDT)

Looking at the current data set. It unfortunately don't reveals anything significant (to me) other than definitely showing that there is a additional quality modifier at work. What modifier(s) that might be can't be determent by the current data set. The suggested possible random modifier is a modifier type that can only be determent by first eliminating all other possible modifiers. (The DF & HT is shown to be not the only modifier(if it is one) at work.) ... Mmm, I think a per case id is also needed, to easy indicate which case one is talking about (later). --.MvGulik. 07:07, 5 September 2013 (EDT)

Four things are likely, but none of them definitive, with the current results.

1. There's no difference between table and rack (for seed QL purpose)
2. QL of table doesn't matter
3. There is some random range involved
4. The quality of WWW influences the QL of seed (HT avg WWW QL=22.6, avg seed QL=13.5; DR avg WWW QL=31, avg seed QL=19.1)

Seperate theory fitting results, if there's no skill/tool modifiers involved then possible QL equation is $Q_{Seed}=[{\frac {Q_{WWW}}{3}},Q_{WWW}]$ --Rook (talk) 09:28, 5 September 2013 (EDT)

Mmm. Looking at a small result set with WWW's on a table. It looks a bit like it might be only the table q that matters (obfuscated with some random range). Its kinda a small set, so no hard stuff available. But if that's the case, it should make it a bit easier to flush out. Time to use a other-q table. --.MvGulik. 13:21, 1 October 2013 (EDT)

the quality of table is definitely matter, maybe standard quality formula is involved $QM={\sqrt {\frac {Q}{10}}}$ and maybe this multiplier somehow applying to the www, some pictures: before and after drying on q226 table --.hbtr. 13:21, 19 april 2014 (EDT)