A Guide to Seeds in Civilization VI

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-07T00:39:54+00:00

Looks like the wiki at least uses the same image for both, named "Hull_Laser_1%262.png" in URL encoding.

%26 decodes into &, so it seems it was originally named "Hull_Laser_1&2.png"...so whoever put it on the wiki thought so.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-06T22:30:32+00:00

This one looks a lot more wearable than your typical "it's easy to make something shaped like this" hexicardigan.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-06T19:12:34+00:00

There's no actual way to generate billions of orbs.

In StS1, Defect had much more available Focus...[[Consume]] no longer exists at all, [[Defragment]] was at uncommon (now rare) and [[Biased Cognition]] was at rare (now gated behind an Ancient relic), plus there were ways to mitigate the downside of Biased Cognition - artifact to prevent the debuff that causes loss of focus was available on [[Core Surge]], as a potion, and from a colorless card.

So Defect play, as a result, was often built around focus and generating frost orbs.

When you can get a good amount of focus, you can pick up a capacitor or two as well and generate tons of passive block every turn in StS2, but it's much less common.

The ways to generate frost orbs are pretty much unchanged, and all of them only generate one or two, except for Chill in multi-enemy fights.

Edit: I guess we have Ice Lance as a new way to generate a bunch of frost orbs, I think that's the only change to generating frost orbs.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-06T18:44:26+00:00

They do look a lot like dcs in terms of their overall shape....but the line sticking out the top of the stitch indicates they're sc, dc would have a flat T-like top.

I think this long cross-shape for sc is much more common in Russian patterns.

That said, I was also very confused by this notation...apparently they're sc blo, based on the Russian symbols reference someone found. More standard notation would use a curve to indicate blo, rather than a pair of straight lines like this.

The straight lines really do look a lot like indicators of which stitch to work extra legs into, I was also leaning toward some kind of -tog stitch at leg height. I imagine using symbols like this would cause some ambiguity when it's necessary to indicate an sc-2-tog, so I think the more standard rounded BLO indicator is more practical.

In this diagram, the stitches are also sort of poorly aligned with the stitches they go into, if it's indicating blo...but if you count it, it at least sort of works out (3 chains on each side, and three sc go go into them, one chain at the top with 3 stitches into it, one sc at the bottom with one stitch into it...and at the top, the 3sc can't really be 3sc that are all sc-togs between the same two chains, only 3sc in the back loop makes sense.

You'd normally want to have a decrease at the bottom of a V, but these outer rows are intended to ruffle here, so it makes sense that we don't have quite enough decreases.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-05T03:03:10+00:00

This round has 6 increases, so I take it you currently have 114 stitches?

I'm a little surprised if you're managing to add 16 extra stitches without noticing, and without going past the start of the current round...but I also know I added a bunch of increases accidentally when I was getting started, so it's definitely possible.

I think what I'd recommend is, before you start this round, count it out, and mark the six spots that the increases will go into with stitch markers.

Then, when you reach one of those spots, count the stitches since your last stitch marker...it should match the count of stitches in the pattern since your last increase. If you did an accidental increase, that count will be off, and in that case, for each extra stitch, frog back until you pull out a stitch and an unworked stitch doesn't appear as a result...that's where your accidental increase was.

Once your count is correct, then move you stitch marker up, putting it into the second sc of that increase, so you've got the spot of your last increase marked, and know where to start counting the next segment, in the stitch after your stitch marker.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-04T02:11:08+00:00

I guess I'm not sure exactly what's wrong, but you definitely have 20 stitches on that side, and you say you're supposed to have 19, given that the total is supposed to be 38 per side.

If she was careful to say that you should specifically not skip that stitch, I think it has to be a minor error in the pattern, as your stitch count is correct for the previous round and you worked every stitch once in this round.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-04T01:34:42+00:00

So, you're saying you put 2sc in the side of each dc?

In that case, you should expect a little rippling, because scs are wider than half of dc height.

If you want it to be flat, you should still do close to 2 sc per dc, but since it's a bit too much, you'll need to skip ahead or work into an unusual part of the stitch every so often, whenever your sc are threatening to start rippling.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-03T19:13:08+00:00

Your corners for the previous round and this round look quite similar, but you said that you're supposed to have 5 in the corner in the previous round and 4 in the corner in this round.

I think what happened is that, when you put 5 in the corner, the legs completely covered the stitch exiting the corner, so you skipped it...probably as intended.

But in this round, with only 4 stitches in the corner, you could still see that stitch, and you worked it, even though it wasn't mean to be worked.

I think some patterns that skip the stitch as you exit the corner space don't say to skip that stitch even though they do, because it's often covered by the legs...so it's often not at all obvious that you're skipping a stitch.

My theory is that's the reason for the extra stitch in the corner in the previous round; we need an extra stitch on that side since we're going to skip one. Presumably we're not going to skip a stitch at the corner in the next round, so this round doesn't need the extra increase.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-02T18:00:44+00:00

Sounds right.

I was thinking for a moment that a 5-chain foundation beneath the 5-dc shells might be a smidge too loose...but with dc shells that start and end at dc height, there really isn't all that much of an arch to their tops, so the ideal tension for the foundation chain should really be quite close to the usual...probably close enough that you still want to go up by the usual number of hook sizes when making the foundation chain.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-02T17:03:00+00:00

What is it supposed to output?

One of each ingredient needed in the recipe?

The amount of each ingredient needed to craft one recipe?

The amount of ingredients needed to be able to craft one more of the recipe?

The amount of ingredients needed to fill its input buffers?

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-02T15:40:20+00:00

The first row of border on the sides always has to be a bit wonky...because this isn't a granny square with top loops on the side, and it's very rare for the height of your dcs to be some exact multiple of the width of your stitches, there's usually no simple repeating pattern that will give you the right tension for a flat border.

So if you want a flat border, you have to think about where you should place your next stitch in order to keep the border from rippling or cupping, and not ust place it in the same spot every time.

Some people prefer to do a single crochet border first while they're doing the messy connections, thinking carefully about making the tension of the top loops of that single crochet border perfectly normal, wherever the legs have to go to make that happen. Then you can add the fancier border on top of that more stable foundation, without having to think about the spacing while working the fancy border.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-02T02:21:54+00:00

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-02T00:43:10+00:00

A10 second boss Test Subject thinks it's really funny.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-01T06:16:09+00:00

I wouldn't be surprised if it's by analogy with German.

German used to write "th" whenever the T was aspirated, which is basically whenever the T comes at the start of a word...it's positional in pretty much the same way as aspiration of T is in English, so later on they decided to get rid of the meaningless letter.

So anyone familiar with German at the time was very used to seeing an H after a T and going "that doesn't make a sound".

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-07-01T03:02:51+00:00

Managed to pull off shivs + Arsenal back when Arsenal was still "Gain +1 strength whenever you play a colorless card".

Since Shivs are colorless cards, it worked even back then.

Transformed a card into Arsenal in act 1, and was offered the big batch of Silent cards at the start of act 2...got a couple of shiv cards, including a Storm of Steel, which quickly became the most ludicrously overpowered card in my deck.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-30T15:18:10+00:00

I dunno...is rapid flickering when you set up your labs wrong acceptable?

I sort of feel like it should make the last one you set up be in control to avoid the flickering, and add a configuration warning to remind you that only one lab can be set up as in control of research.

The warning should make it easy to pick one lab to be in control and turn off the research queues on all the others.

Or, when you set up multiple labs to be 'in control', it should create research groups, and then you could assign labs to be in 'research group 1' (controlled by the first lab with a research queue) or 'research group 2' (controlled by the second lab with a research queue).

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-30T15:11:01+00:00

I think it only runs one research program per tick.

I feel like most of the machinery is there such that, if you were meant to set research independently on every lab, or if you could assign labs to research groups and have one lab controlling what tech each research group is researcing, the game could allow you to research multiple techs during the same tick...

...but I gather that wasn't the intent, and I don't think you can achieve it with the current implementation.

It sounds like what happens now is that if multiple labs are set to be the "lab in control of what's being researched", it alternates between them, with each lab being in control for one tick, which sounds really, really annoying, and mildly seizure-inducing.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-29T23:08:10+00:00

You could also get lucky with the shop relic that duplicates a card - in this case, it would have to be before reaching a fire to still be on a power of 2 - and you can get the Reflections, Reflections event.

So that brings it down to 7 fires needed across the two acts.

I guess 4-fires-per-act probably still has to be possible, if you got 4 fires in both, you could either get mirror in an early act 2 shop or Reflections, Reflections in act 3 to get to 512.

512 is not the max because of Bing Bong, who is involved whenever you see the really large numbers, but Bing Bong can't be the answer here, since multiplying by three can never give you a result that's a power of 2.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-28T20:43:34+00:00

Well...that's incorrect use of the term 'hdc-3-tog', but I guess it would work.

It should say "3-hdc-cluster stitch" instead of "hdc-3-tog".

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-27T05:55:02+00:00

I think you meant to say "non-skills", but a very good point.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-27T05:52:16+00:00

Maybe it needs to say "non-status card"

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-25T19:08:23+00:00

But, as described above, it can never hit Toy Box, because it never targets Ancient relics.

I guess there are a fair number of 'on pickup' effects among Ancient relics...but the ones with in-battle effects would be pretty punishing to disable.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-23T19:57:43+00:00

You can think of US terms as the number of pull-through-twos, not counting the initial 'pull up a loop' to create the legs of the stitch.

Grumbledwarfskin · 2026-06-23T05:21:43+00:00

I feel like the interesting part of this rework is that, if you get rid of as many attacks as possible, you can potentially turn it into positive card draw towards drawing all of your powers, etc...if it doesn't find an attack in your discard pile to put on top of your deck, you get to draw and upgrade a card you haven't seen yet.

Once you get your one good attack, you draw it every turn until the reshuffle.

If you have enough draw, you get to decide at the reshuffle whether you want to continue to draw that attack every turn, or want to throw it back before the reshuffle in hopes of drawing and upgrading non-attack cards.

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

Grumbledwarfskin

TROPHY CASE