It is a bug (or an error) from a software testing perspective. That is, the documentation + expectations and the actual software don't agree.
In this case, player expectation is that non-PR below-excellent materials do not / cannot suffer from weather. This is reaffirmed by the vast majority of the game world, which perform exactly as described. Other authoritative sources of information do not exist.
The problem arises because, as you said, someone was lazy enough and created a deposit which contains both excellent and choice materials. A player prospecting for a specific grade (choice) gets an unexpected result (weather!), due to mechanics of weather (it being defined at deposit level). A simple separation of the materials in two deposits would solve the discrepancy.
Yes, it is not a technical bug, nothing to fix in the code. It is still a bug from a player perspective. Even if Winch Gate themselves were to come and say "this is intended", it would still violate the principle of having coherent rules in the game world..
@Loved : sorry, kinda derailed your topic. Your proposal would make a very nice scenario in a Pocket World, if they ever become a thing. In the current game world, I simply don't see how you would make it work..
In this case, player expectation is that non-PR below-excellent materials do not / cannot suffer from weather. This is reaffirmed by the vast majority of the game world, which perform exactly as described. Other authoritative sources of information do not exist.
The problem arises because, as you said, someone was lazy enough and created a deposit which contains both excellent and choice materials. A player prospecting for a specific grade (choice) gets an unexpected result (weather!), due to mechanics of weather (it being defined at deposit level). A simple separation of the materials in two deposits would solve the discrepancy.
Yes, it is not a technical bug, nothing to fix in the code. It is still a bug from a player perspective. Even if Winch Gate themselves were to come and say "this is intended", it would still violate the principle of having coherent rules in the game world..
@Loved : sorry, kinda derailed your topic. Your proposal would make a very nice scenario in a Pocket World, if they ever become a thing. In the current game world, I simply don't see how you would make it work..
---