OFFICIAL NEWS

-choice mats in the same deposit that the xl are, have the same weather/season restrictions
-100m works as it say it does. I will simplificate a bit, but say you're prospecting for 10 nodes. in this case, the game will check 10 random positions in the area of your prospection. if you use 100m and 360 deg, thats a lot of area, and the chance of you hitting the area theat you want (~4 square metters?) is very very low. if you remove the range, and keep the 360 degrees, you know exactly where those 10 positions will be: 3m around you.

if you are letting your reference (packer) at the border of the deposit (the tracking result), and going around it, more than half of the area you prospect wont have anything (its ouside).


the way I do after finding the spot:
-based on where i came from, picture in my head the direction of the deposit after the border
-then prospect ~40 ~60m with a low angle (20deg)
-turn 40~60 deg
-repeat

this covers most of the deposit, except some rare cases where the real pop area you want is too small (ive seen some around ~1 square meter....)

So it looks like #1 won because they are not doing anything. Bummer. :(

Hello,

An official answer will be publicated during the week-end.

Oh, what are those new grey numbers? Real people's votes?

f2p

Hello,

Due to an unforeseen event, we have to postpone the official communication to Monday 18 February. Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience.

Yowza! Real-time communication!

Thank you for your continuing efforts Tamarea.

Dear players,

The poll results show that options 1 and 3 are almost tied (at 203 and 208 votes respectively.) However, the relevance of these results can be called into question due to the fact that votes by free trial accounts are also counted in this number.

Therefore we have decided to only count votes cast by suscribed accounts in order to give a fairest view of the survey results. See the results here.

The first figure shows the total number of votes (subscribed + free trial.) The second figure between brackets, shows the number of votes by free trial accounts.

If we count only the votes by subscibed accounts, the following results are gotten:
1st option: 157 votes from subscribed accounts, or 38.67% of votes;
2nd option: 77 votes from subscribed accounts, or 18.97% of votes;
3rd option: 172 votes from subscribed account, or 42.36% of votes.

The 3rd option has the most votes and thus prevails, meaning that all forage resources in the Prime Roots will be returned to their pre-merge locations at the next reboot of the server.

The prospecting message bug mentioned in the survey is being worked on by the dev team with high priority.

Best regards,

Ryzom Team

Thank you for the update and wish me luck remapping =)

I deleted so many old markers.. and wasn't clever enough to keep an old save file.. oh well, the joy of the change was that PR was much more fun to 're-learn' again..

I guess use whatever works for you but I have used that method for 8 years before merge w/o fail....find what I need most of the time by 60m....95% of the time before running outta distance and 100% of the time using the circle thing. I fail to understand your quote above, when ya stand at the packer and cast, you cover half the range out from it .... when ya do the circle you overlap what ya just did.

well... now you do what 42% want. just great.

never change anything. it's discomfort to have things change.

Please include Nexus! There is really no reason to go there anymore except an occasional lower named creature

Not quite. First, they did what 61.33% (42.36% + 18.97%) wanted, namely arranging the nodes grouped by material. Then they did what 69% out of these two groups wanted.

What would have been the alternative? Misrespecting the 61.33% in favor of the 38.67%, or rather misrespect the 81.03%, and do what the 18.97% wanted? It was a bold and unusual decision of the Devs and CSR to leave the decision what to do to a ballot. That way they showed their respect for the community. Misrespecting the vote would have destroyed that.
Well there was a change, though a change back. I would have preferred solution 2, which would indeed have been a major change. But I recognize that this solution has not been appreciated by the majority, and I have no problem to respect that.