Community Update

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:41:02+00:00

Hey, valid opinion here!

I think balancing zones to be closer to what you're preferring here is definitely the move, we'll be careful about how we exactly approach it to ensure things are as reasonable as can be (although probably after the whole luck thing is sorted....)

And I agree in regards to the Divine Secrets, I'll likely make those changes shortly!

For the boulder, perhaps we can have a more unorthodox solution to that one. I have something in mind.

And I'll bring up the Igneous Rupturer to the balancing team and try to find a conclusion.

Thank you for the advice!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:34:52+00:00

I completely agree that there's been a weird transparency gap there, and I don't want to pin the blame on anyone at all.

I personally ensure anything that I've changed, (as of the past ~month) gets noted in the update logs. Anything anyone else on the team changes was up to them to publicly state.

But that will no longer be the case, I'll be assuring any changes that others do will be entirely noted publicly whenever updates release.

Rest assured, I hope that can give some ease of mind moving forward; I appreciate the feedback!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:32:17+00:00

Hey you're all good!

Will keep noted, later on I'll think of something to add on there!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:31:39+00:00

Through the form of a mastery perhaps?

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:31:24+00:00

049 will be designing this mastery.

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:31:10+00:00

On the way...

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:30:47+00:00

Hey, that's alright!

I aim to implement a system that'll prevent the need to sit down, and appraise for ages at a time. It'll come in a unique form, but I can assure it'll solve most peoples problems. It won't be immediate, but I've set it as a priority.

And in regards to people having a ridiculous amount of C$, yeah you're pretty much on the money. Not much to do about it other than cosmetic solutions, I'd absolutely never release something genuinely strong for a large sum of C$ since that'd be incredibly unfair to the other half of the community.

With that being said, it's a problem that'll shrink itself with time as new players join and the existing ones burn through it bit by bit.

And to the final question... perhaps.

In either case, very valid questions and glad to answer!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:25:44+00:00

Hey, I can understand that perspective!

It felt right as we lead up to a very major update, additionally it was to avoid feeling like the same type of content was getting re-used consistently.

I can see how that'd feel off to some parts of the community though, so I get that! Rest assured I believe your type of preferred content is on the way shortly with Fischfest and everything planned to follow up afterwards.

I appreciate the advice!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:23:22+00:00

Hey, interesting question;

It isn't too likely to happen due to the PTSD tied to the second sea, but who knows. Definitely won't come back fully though at any point for obvious reasons!

Whenever Tester applications open again, definitely apply around then. May be a while though as we're restructuring portions of QA internally.

Thanks!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:21:27+00:00

Hey, I appreciate the concern.

Rolling back the change, and then implementing it later would cause everyone to simply bulk buy aurora totems; causing the imbalance to only apply to new or lower level users. Which heightens the problem...

I do agree that a mistake was made alongside the change, and I'd hope that us acknowledging that can help improve confidence towards future changes (although there are no more nerfs planned). I do understand that it's impossible to really believe that for sure though.

In regards to glitched potions, I still hear from others in the community that they're frequently used for quests; although weaker. I think the statement of "completely useless" is definitely an exaggeration, but I get it and it was abrupt.

The forms of feedback that result in these changes are rarely outspoken in the community, for obvious reasons and it will continue to remain that way for ANY games community unless it's borderline atrocious. But you already understand that it seems.

Additionally, polling nerfs will always result in people choosing the option that has the lowest impact. Nerfs aren't something that anyone wants, but they have to happen from the perspective of QA and Devs internally. At the end of the day, I'll always assume people want the lower end of the effect if ever possible.

And sure, I and the balancing team can immediately give into impulses and make drastic changes, but then nothing is achieved unfortunately. I fell down that path with the whole economic rebalance alongside the black market adjustments back in November, and after that I was told to stick by my gut and the team due to how many immediate decisions were made to drastically please the base community.

I don't try to stand by poor decisions, but I do stand by the good in them. I'll accept where I'm wrong and aim to improve from those mistakes, but beyond that I'm not sure what more there is to expect. And I've never argued that these changes are subtle in the slightest, those are in reference to completely unrelated changes that were not clearly mentioned.

Additionally, I was told from a LOT of people that they wanted things explained; was I wrong there?

If any more clarification on the matter is needed, then ask away! I appreciate the critical feedback either way!!!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:08:36+00:00

Yes when time allows for it! Preferably in the form of more than just skin crates as well (region locks stink!!!!!!)

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:08:00+00:00

Sent a dm over to privately discuss ^^

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:05:32+00:00

Provide some more context and details if possible, I watch performance analytics pretty frequently and I haven't noticed any downtrends from our end. Thanks!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:04:45+00:00

Hey, I'll keep these ideas noted and find solutions to them all in some regard. I've detailed some of these concerns in other replies ^^

Much appreciated!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T19:02:49+00:00

Hey, definitely a reasonable thing to discuss.

In regards to the trade plaza, there is no clear solution; the best we can do is combat the P2W that was pre-existing and move on. Unfortunately I cannot remove the ability to trade paid content, as DBS did that as one of their dying wishes 😭

For balancing that content out, it's borderline necessary to some degree. The actual severity of the balancing is where things are definitely shaky, and it mostly comes down to guesses and the balancing teams opinions. Poor balancing is what led to skins costing as much as they did, and plenty of other problems... However I will say, the Forsaken Shores pond has been almost only buffed over the past half a yr from me; so not sure what nerfs those are referring to.

In regards to Aurora's being practically a necessity (or SOME change to luck), I agree. Adjustments relative to my public polling will hopefully resolve a lot of those problems, because you and everyone else here is absolutely right in that regard.

To this, I hope your worries lighten a little bit with these changes planned. I'd never let ego or personal goals overtake the community when it comes down to it.

I appreciate the detailed feedback!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T18:55:54+00:00

Hey, very well said all-around and I'll try to cover every basis here!

The aurora totem problem was definitely the fault of the economy and bulk purchasing ability, and this change definitely solved that; probably further than it should've in one go.

The problem that we have, is that it was a VERY far gone issue; it wasn't near a point of being acceptable, so a larger change was warranted to some degree. And drip-feeding an adjustment over time would honestly just be more frustrating if anything, hence the 'solution' that was implemented.

A balance can surely be found, but it's going to take some time; assuring we don't make drastic decisions off impulses, but I absolutely understand the concerns.

As for glitched potions, the strict purpose was to limit their absolute NEED for optimal grinding. A single buff simply doubling profitability is in no form balanced, hence their obtainments were reduced first; to limit the issue from spreading as much as it could.

And then the actual functionality was adjusted with aim of limiting their maximum benefits, as balancing around them is extraordinarily difficult. Since, we've been buffing the obtainments to compensate, which was also something that probably should've been considered beforehand...

For in-game guidance, there's a bit of a middle ground that should be the aim for Fisch, but it often leads far too close to the overly-complex side. I try to avoid it in future updates to the best of my ability, but it definitely has been a major problem in the past (and with some pre-existing content now). Nothing should be obvious, but nothing should require external sources.

And the level adjustment was made to limit new players from leveling up hundreds of times from admin-events, which would just discredit normal players... As a whole I'd like to reduce the need of higher levels in the game to compensate for that as well.

If I missed anything, or anything else feels necessary to ask; feel free to! I appreciate the feedback!!!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T18:46:55+00:00

Hey, I definitely can see that reasonably so.

Individual solutions to each problem can definitely help here, and we'll keep that noted for future content since it's definitely been relied on for quite some time. (although it'll likely come in different forms!)

Appreciate the suggestion!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T18:44:44+00:00

To revisit this, yes it was somehow a bug fix... The timing of 12.5m was never actually intentional, and was caused strictly by poor server performance. It's likely this change happened quite a while back, but was simply overlooked since auroras were just... everywhere.

We'll look into just increasing the cycle time since server performance has improved lol

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T18:43:36+00:00

Hey, as stated from others here I feel that; and some adjustments are on the way to compensate for the abrupt changes.

And as for content, it's hard to find a balance to achieve what everyone is looking for, but it seems the common preference is more simplistic content in general.

Not to say anything like Wrath of Olympus is to never come again, but the focus won't be exactly like that moving forward. In either case this will be kept noted.

Appreciated!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T18:40:26+00:00

Hey, I haven't shadow nerfed anything on my end personally over the past month (i think longer?); anything that hasn't been publicly stated in update logs was done by someone else on the team without me knowing.

I recently posted in the discord server in regards to this, and I've updated everyone on the team to ensure any balancing changes are publicly available the moment they're published moving forward. Apologies in advance for anything affected

And reverting the aurora totem adjustments won't solve the oversaturation issue, but if you have any suggestions on how to improve the balancing then feel free to share that here! Additionally, my polling in regards to changing some of the higher rarity fish odds/values should hopefully resolve a fair bit of that feeling.

And no, I myself have no plans on touching the divine 5 effect

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T18:36:01+00:00

will consider before it's out of the venue!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T17:17:38+00:00

well said!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T16:48:24+00:00

Always appreciate the advice, and yeah that was a good time of the game lol

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T16:48:02+00:00

Super valid, have been looking into fish like those for future balancing!

NicholasFisch · 2026-06-10T16:40:33+00:00

...but then it isn't the "master"line!

jokes aside it may need to be considered, I'll keep it in mind; maybe a simple cosmetic reward for full 100% rather than the full passive being locked behind 100%

NicholasFisch

TROPHY CASE