Legacy talk:Foraging

clarify please

The article says:

• There is a base value to start spotting foragable goods. Higher stats will increase the spotting chance, until reaching 4 times the base value.

Can anyone clarify the second sentence? Does it mean that the probability to spot is increased 4 times, or that there's no point leveling PER*EXP further than 4 times the base value? -- unsigned comment by Theodor 13:20, 25 March 2011 (GMT)

Rewrote ambiguous sentence to the best of my abilities, I hope it's clearer now. Foetuses [talk][cont.] 15:01, 15 January 2013 (EST)

On the spot probability

Suppose a herb is growing near your house. Each time you exit the house you spot that herb with a certain chance (dependant on your per*exp). So if you enter-exit the house many times (say, 100), and count how many times did you see that plant, you can get an approximation to the real spot chance. Maybe, when we have enough data, we can get the formula how is that chance calculated.

So, at 725 per*exp (25*29) have spotted Tangled Bramble 78/100 times. And at 18*29 =522 per*exp (without spectacles), only 40/100.

Earlier I've experimented with candleberry and with per*exp=297 (11*27) spotted it 15/50 times.

Any ideas about the formula?

Theodor 20:26, 26 March 2011 (CDT)

Okay, it seems that there's a thereshold per*exp value to start seeing a herb and every 5 per*exp above that increase the chance of finding it by 1%. If this is true, then Tangled Bramble minimal per*exp would be ~320 and candleberry's - around 150. The wiki states that the lowest reported per*exp to spot these herbs are 351 and 160 respectively which are very close! Theodor 20:35, 26 March 2011 (CDT)

Disregard that, most probably I was wrong from the start. Quoting Jorb: "Rustroot's base level is 1000. Which means you'll start seeing them at 500 and see all of them at 2000." -- unsigned comment by Theodor 02:46, 27 March 2011 (GMT)

You could still be right, if they're first seen at level/2 and all are seen at 2 * level, the formula could just define 100 levels of gradiation between those two values and add 1% chance for each level. Eg for rustroot:

Min = 500, Max = 2000, range = 1500

range/100 = 15

So at level 500, you see 1% of rustroots. Each 15 PER * EXP you gain awards you an additional 1% chance up to 100%.

Something like: $\operatorname {p} (spotting){=}\operatorname {floor} ({lev-min \over gradiation})+1$%

Where lev is the player's $PER\times EXP$, min is the forageable's $base \over 2$, range is the forageable's $(base\times 2)-({base \over 2})$ and gradiation is $range \over 100$

--SubmittedDenied 00:50, 12 October 2011 (CDT)

WWW

Just as an attempt at clarifying when WWWs show up, I was stuck at 88 per*exp for a fair while and saw none. Doesn't mean much. However I did get one at 99, so they are definitely available under 100. --Knyght 8 September 2011

Table of Perception x Exploration collectables

Note: the table below is bugged, and I have no idea why. Each value is appended with itself again, for some reason. 5050 = 50, 110110 = 110, etc. --Foetuses 14 January 2013

Seems ok to me at this moment. Not seeing what you describe in Crome(beta 25.0.*) or IE(8). Might have been a side effect of the resent wiki errors. (If a page shows something odd, you can force a special manual page-cache update by just saving a un-edited edit. To see if its not some wiki-cache related issue.) --.MvGulik. 13:47, 15 January 2013 (EST)

(Reference) Sorry for not noticing I was blocking RoB.com on NoScript, heh. Lots of reinstallations here and there can mess me up like that. I didn't notice the problem in IE, only Firefox Beta (18 and 19), though it probably has to do with the script blocking. Perhaps a warning of some sort about enabling JavaScript might be useful. The problem is now, though, conclusively resolved, at least from my point of view. Foetuses [talk][cont.] 14:41, 15 January 2013 (EST)

Aha. Yep, disabling JavaScript is doing that (tested with Chrome). "JavaScript note": I have not seen any other complains in relation to this, so I think its not really needed. But if you like, you could add a note about it in one of the general pages. so its semi documented. --.MvGulik. 18:22, 15 January 2013 (EST)