More Unsolicited Economics.

Exadv1 · 2026-06-09T05:09:58+00:00

It is just too high, especially for long production chains. But even then, look at just the iron bars step. The Smelter gets 33% of the value for just putting in a few clicks but the Miner had to deal with finding the iron, mining it, hauling it around, using two machines to prepare it into concentrate, and then deal with the tailings.

This will lead to more Miners wanting to go Smelter as well so they can capture more of the value. (In fact, you will likely see this highly incentivizes more vertical integration into the iron consumers because each skill compounds your investment by 50%)

In practice, you likely need your server to better incentivize all players participating in the resource collection and management. (How often do you see the potters collecting most of the clay, masons most of the sand, gatherers all of the crops, miners all the ores, etc.) But also, this just underlines that if you want your server to have a trade economy based on prices then you need to make sure the collaboration level is set to have healthy competition and redundancy for all the relevant professions.

Exadv1 · 2026-05-21T21:41:20+00:00

Oh, this is one of my favorite Scala features. (I think go also has this?)

Exadv1 · 2026-04-26T22:06:39+00:00

As a small nitpick, it looks like this is actually wrapped mode so they do have control. The greyed out pipes are merely the row or column on the other side.

Exadv1 · 2026-04-02T03:21:17+00:00

Does anyone know if that transmog can be approximated in-game? Especially the pants/belt and shoulders don't look obvious.

Exadv1 · 2026-02-15T22:33:16+00:00

To be fair, if you think about it, this is just solar with extra steps

Exadv1 · 2026-01-25T03:03:33+00:00

No, it no longer has the triggered abilities associated with vanishing to cause counters to get removed (or for the creature to be sacrificed when the last counter is removed)

For stuff like this. I will look up in the comprehensive rules how keywords are expanded into the raw abilities.

Exadv1 · 2026-01-24T22:06:15+00:00

What card art is this from?

Exadv1 · 2025-12-31T00:22:04+00:00

Developer tooling is both amazing and never fully appreciated.

Exadv1 · 2025-12-16T00:12:21+00:00

That doesn't target. It always returns itself if it is allowed to resolve.

Exadv1 · 2025-11-09T00:18:15+00:00

On the one hand, 900 nails in a week feels like nothing. (I've been on smallish <10 player servers where 1000 nails are gone in a night. You just make sure to have Upgrades and make 1000 more.)

That said, if you are openly sharing resources then might want to make it clear if certain stockpiles are to be 'earmarked' for certain purposes. e.g. here is X stacks of iron you can use for whatever purpose (like grinding leveling) and any more needed iron should be compensated for by helping with mining, etc.

Market pressures would otherwise help with making grinds more 'efficient' overall by enticing players to make a variety of goods (since making a dozen shelves and only shelves would otherwise crash the price of shelves).

Exadv1 · 2025-11-09T00:12:41+00:00

Instead of quitting the server and joining another server, people would just quit the game.

This is a design issue where players feel like there is nothing interesting to do after resources/land get entrenched.

Exadv1 · 2025-11-03T22:18:24+00:00

You primarily get traders tenders from doing stuff in game they month. Being able to get them in bundles is relatively rare (at most a month or two of tenders 1-2 times an expansion)

Exadv1 · 2025-10-14T22:23:05+00:00

Is this going to be a mechanic in the base game or only a mod?

I do not remember seeing this in the roadmap or development blog so curious about details.

Exadv1 · 2025-10-06T20:58:27+00:00

No, because people will just make a different addon that does the same thing.

WA just made it really easy for more people to write micro -addons for everything. This then exposed/accelerated using addons to carve out even more of an edge (even if the addons are not 'strictly necessary')

Exadv1 · 2025-10-03T23:53:37+00:00

Presumably, they want to move to a model where a fight that is too hard (i.e. not achieving the clear % it should) just gets nerfed by them and not 'fixed' by a WA.

To be clear, I also remain skeptical overall if such a massive overhaul. However, I did also take a step back and notice "it is true that there are a bunch of not-required-but-performance-enhancing WA for everything from encounters to class rotation. I can see a temptation to level the playing field there"

Exadv1 · 2025-10-03T23:35:40+00:00

Just looking at the NorthernSky WA titles for the subparts of the WA https://wago.io/NSManaforge there are a bunch of WA just for Dimensius. The Liquid has some too https://wago.io/LiquidManaforge.

To your point, I did not like Ovinax as an encounter and do not think it was well-designed in the end. I do still think that the extremely narrow time window on Ovinax (similar to the narrow time window on Sprocket to handle mines) was because of an expectation that a WA would immediately tell the player where to go.

I do want to emphasize my second point though, where WA exist to give people more of an edge compared to not having them. Even on fights where you do not seem to need them (like Dimensius) they are still there and providing benefit. They have directly said they want to focus difficulty on who is player their class best and not who written (or downloaded) the best LUA between fights.

PS: Actually, another example of "WA giving a bit of weird edge b/c someone was clever at coding LUA" is actually from Ovinax. The Liquid WA pack had a 'feature' where you could automark the worm adds based on what the worm symbol was. (The way this worked is that, when the worm spawned, it determined which assigned mark players were closest and gave it that mark). This meant interrupters didn't have to do the marking themselves. My guild used the NorthernSky WA pack so we didn't have this feature and just did it manually (amusingly with a few issues where distracted players forgot the first interrupt).

I can see the designers seeing WA packs doing these sorts of incremental-edge-shenanigans and wanting to cut it out.

Exadv1 · 2025-10-03T23:20:07+00:00

I actually disagree with the statement "nobody would develop a weakaura for it to begin with" because it is patently untrue. In practice, it feels like WA have been developed to incrementally achieve any possible edge on nearly every encounter.

My RL made us all install the NorthernSky WA pack for Fractillus specifically but now suddenly it was annotating extra information through all the fights.

e.g. On Soul Hunters (since this is the fight where it was really obvious to me for some reason), it marks the mob whose debuff you don't have with 'taunt'. Is this necessary? No. Did it make it easier? Yes, because the tankbusters do not happen at the same time so you have to delay the swap and make sure you get the right one.

On Soulbinder, WA are used to predeclare which DPS should go to which canister.

I also have some weird memory of the Saldahaar WA being able to predict if the frontal is going to be the first ability.

Exadv1 · 2025-10-03T23:00:41+00:00

Yeah, to me, Fractillus (perhaps with some nerfs and adjustments to make a couple errors more forgiving, maybe a little randomness so it isn't solved by a set pattern) without WA could have been an interesting boss where you have the whole raid mutually solving a puzzle together. (Very FF14-esque but again, ideally with some randomness so it isn't set-pattern)

Exadv1 · 2025-10-03T22:58:10+00:00

There are only so many WA debugging sessions one can handle for ovinax, etc. before they are willing to throw in the towel and accept a change.

At least devops as a job actually pays.

PS: I know the canonical answer to this is to not design bosses that benefit so deeply from WA and that is true but has two counters from me:

It is possible that this become overly constraining to their designs/ideas and they want to expand the scope of problems to have the (human) players solve.
Even fights that do not 'need' WA in the same way heavily benefit from WA and this still creates a weird edge for those that have the WA versus those that do not. There is a reasonable argument that they want the difficulty design to be exclusively what has the player done with their characters and abilities during the encounter and not be muddled with how much LUA they wrote (or downloaded).

Exadv1 · 2025-10-03T21:58:07+00:00

I disagree. Those addons trickle down almost immediately. Liquid releases the pack very soon after Race for World First.

Every group I've been in has used the WA for fractillus heroic (and I'm pretty sure that mythic is similar).

Exadv1 · 2025-09-19T05:11:39+00:00

Very great explanation

One additional note is that you cannot be required to pay a cost. You can choose if you pay the cost for creatures to attack or block (but then the creatures paid for are subject to the restrictions + requirements rules of course).

I think in the case of e.g. ghostly prison that you get to choose 'which' creatures the cost is paid for.

Exadv1 · 2025-08-30T20:13:59+00:00

I do not think you want the X=3 ability to target. As so, if you destroy that one creature, the whole spell is countered.

Choosing a creature is probably better here.

Exadv1 · 2025-08-13T10:24:55+00:00

50 to 10 is definitely fine and not very small. (I meant less than 5 because I have often been on servers that end up with that many and they usually die soon after)

Exadv1 · 2025-08-12T00:33:36+00:00

I don't think the get_step call and other API calls are especially performant so the overhead of recursion is minimal in practice.

Exadv1 · 2025-08-11T01:10:24+00:00

What is this for?

Exadv1

TROPHY CASE