Talk:Ancient Fruit

This talk page is for discussing Ancient Fruit.
Sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text below old text.	Be polite. Assume good faith. Don't delete discussions.

Grading Prices

Ancient Fruit in normal quality costs 825g ( source ) --Unsigned by Shasla

Gold quality sells for 1237g Kektklik (talk) 13:00, 30 March 2016 (EDT)

Yep. I didn't notice what perk I took for farming. My bad Kektklik (talk) 14:16, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Error in Crop Growth Calendar

I would argue that the text of this section should not be generated by a template, as it makes it impossible to correct unless you can edit templates and know how that will affect every use of the template. That's just not "anyone can edit (constructively)"!

The generated text is in error. Plant a seed on 1 Spring, and the base harvest will be available on 1 Summer, the 28th day after planting. The span can be described in more than one way, but the first day after 1 Spring is 2 Spring. 1 Summer is the 28th after. Check it out.

Whoever is responsible, make sure the wording says what is intended, and check the results at all template uses. This makes for a much more difficult fix, yes? Hardly proof of a sensible application of templates, wouldn't you agree? Butterbur (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2018 (BST)

But don't feel too bad. The ancient Romans counted all things, including days, in the manner used by the current template: 2nd day after 1 Spring is 2 Spring, 29th day is 1 Summer. It actually is internally consistent numerically. You simply must interpret "after" according to the intended usage. Kind of works for Ancient Fruit too. But you have to know this little fact first. Butterbur (talk) 06:21, 26 April 2018 (BST)

The Calendar and template aren't wrong. The calendar shows that if you plant it on day 1 of the season, on day 28 it will still not have a fruit. It may be necessary to mention that the fruit is bore on the next day, but as of right now the calendar is accurate, it doesn't claim that there is a fruit available on day 28. Since this is the only exception in the game, it would be unwise to add an additional day to the template that is only used in one case.

--Shinra07 (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2018 (BST)

The template is wrong. I am not claiming that there will be fruit on 28 Spring. I said so in the comment above, that it will be available on 1 Summer. What I am saying is that 28 Spring is the 27th day after Spring 1, and that 1 Summer is the 28th day after Spring 1. You're counting like the ancient Romans, who had no zero (which is why they did it that way). I am counting with knowledge of zeroes, which is how we do it today. Count it out for yourself. Make a list if necessary. Butterbur (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2018 (BST)

Butterbur, suggesting that someone needs to make a list to count to 28 could be construed as insulting. Let's watch the tone, please. In addition, there is ample documentation of mediawiki syntax (including templates and transclusion) via the link at the bottom of every page of this wiki. By my count, however, it is 3:1 against changing the wording or the calendar. margotbean (talk) 20:52, 26 April 2018 (BST)

Goodness! I surely didn't mean to offend! Please accept my apologies! I only was trying to be clear and emphatic, and to point Shinra to the correction. Nothing more. I didn't mean to use so much force.

But Margotbean, what is the problem with changing the wording (not the calendar)? It gives incorrect information! The calendar shows the day of planting and the 27 days that follow it. The last Sunday is 27 days after, not 28. I don't understand why there is resistance to making the correction. Butterbur (talk) 09:12, 27 April 2018 (BST)

I was going to say 2 things:

1. It's like the time you argued in favor of saying that fruit trees needed to be in the middle of a 5x5 clear grid, even though it was technically incorrect, it sounded right to you.
2. If you figure out how to make the change, I won't undo it as incorrect.

Now you've made the change despite the opposition, and I won't undo it. But with edit disputes, generally the majority wins. margotbean (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2018 (BST)

What change? I tried editing Crop Growth Calendars, but the change was not transcluded to this page. I've reversed that for the time being.

What opposition? You have not discussed the issue until now, and if I may say so, in a less than civil manner also. Shinra has not replied. So what is this "3:1 against" attitude? Where do you get that?

I just can't believe there is an argument over what is essentially kindergarten arithmetic, nothing more than counting! The fruit trees were not such. If you plant them as closely to each other as you can, each one ends up in the middle of a 5x5 clear grid, so long as it is surrounded by other fruit trees. The grids overlap in this case. You can describe the situation differently so that you don't allow grids to overlap, and that works out better as a description because it also takes into consideration planting other things near fruit trees. But as far as what I had learned, and within the boundaries of the context I was articulating, I wasn't wrong. When I found out more, I yielded to a more general and useful context, and that gave better wording to the description, which no longer wanted overlapping 5x5 grids. So, what's to learn about counting? Where's the contextual misunderstanding? There's got to be something simple, because we can't both be right and still disagree! Majority does NOT win in this case, because the math decides. So it must be how the math is put into words that is the problem.

So talk to me! Look, and see, and understand what I'm saying! Do you honestly think I could be wrong about the arithmetic? I honestly think there is NO CHANCE that you could be wrong about the arithmetic. But there's a muddle of words going on, and that is what needs sorting. You CANNOT be understanding what I am saying; it's IMPOSSIBLE! And I guarantee that I don't understand WHY. But that's because you have never said what you think is wrong! Now to me, that looks stubborn to the point of incivility. But I forgive that because the whole thing appears so stupid, it hardly seems stubborn to be unyielding. It's the silence that creates the impression of incivility. And I'm unwilling to let that impression remain, because to me it doesn't seem at all consistent with your general demeanor. It's time for some more trust and good faith between us.

All that aside, if the article can produce differences of interpretation in two (or more) intelligent and informed readers, is it not to the benefit of the Wiki to try to make it clearer?

One thing I will say about that. "Days after" ought to be a completely workable phrase, and I don't see that a change ought to be made there. The Wiki already uses it in other places. Robin builds or upgrades buildings in 2 or 3 days (depending on which ones), and the Wiki makes it clear that the improvement becomes available at 6AM 2 or 3 "days after" the order is placed. Similarly with Clint's upgrades of tools. So, order a Coop upgrade or an Axe upgrade on 1 Spring, and it will be ready "2 days after", which is easily recognizable as meaning first thing on 3 Spring. Add 1 + 2 to get 3. I'm sure we must agree on that. BUT I have not heard you say so, and given the circumstances, it would be useful to hear. So let's start with that. Butterbur (talk) 20:32, 27 April 2018 (BST)

OK, {{ping|Margotbean}}. You've been very active for over two hours, and I take it that you have decided not to reply. If I am right, that just means that we cannot even find grounds for speaking. That's not healthy for a Wiki any more than incivility would be. Since you're the one editor I keep bumping into around here, I think it best to avoid any more misunderstandings. It's certainly not my wish to leave, but that would be better than to clash. I hold no hard feelings, except regret about what should have been resolvable. I wish you well and hope that will leave you in peace. It was good while it lasted. Butterbur (talk) 23:02, 27 April 2018 (BST)

You overestimate my ability to respond to several paragraphs of text while simultaneously changing the name of a template in 7 languages.

Change the Crops Calendar page, edit the Ancient Fruit page and immediately save without making changes. This will force the Ancient Fruit page to update. margotbean (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2018 (BST)

I'm glad I was jumping the gun. But I'm not changing the page until others understand that what I'm saying is correct. A Wiki's a community effort, and I'm not going to try forcing anyone's hand - certainly not yours. An honest thought deserves consideration, even if it turns out to be a mistake, even if it looks too simple to be mistaken about. Your thought, my thought, whichever.

If somebody reads that page and gets the notion that the fruit planted on 1 Spring matures any time other than 1 Summer, then it's a problem. I'm saying that's what I did. How anyone can get 1 Summer from "29 days after", using today's number system, is a mystery to me.

However, I have shown how that's exactly what they'd get using the old Roman system. It's not anti-intuitive, and it's easy to slide into even today. It's an off-by-one, familiar to all programmers as an error induced by one-based arithmetic vs. zero-based. They each work if you use them consistently. They don't work if you use them together. And for the last four to five hundred years, we've had a zero-based system in Europe and the lands they spread colonies to. Some others had it before Europe. So we do have a nearly universal cultural convention to go by: zero-based. 28 days after planting. It's our convention. But it's still only a convention, and sometimes our intuition leads us to a different one. Ever stare right at a computer bug for hours and tell yourself "no, that's got to be right"? Butterbur (talk) 02:50, 28 April 2018 (BST)

Multi-seasonal growth calendar?

Coffee Bean and Corn (and maybe some others I'm forgetting) have a very handy multi-seasonal growth calendar. Since Ancient Fruit is a common choice of crop due to being the highest value multi-harvest crop, it would probably be worth creating it. It will be harder than Coffee Bean, though, since it will need to span 3 season.

I do not think it would be worth creating additional growth calendars for planting at different dates (like Strawberry does), since there's no compelling reason to wait other than obtaining your first one at a random point of time or personal choices (like waiting for greenhouse).

Thoughts? Volunteers? Bladeoflight16 (talk) 22:40, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Since growth takes 28 days and regrowth takes 7 days, it would be redundant info. Basically, draw an invisible line from the harvest image down to the next week, and you have your calendar, if that makes sense. I don't think adding the extra seasons would be worth the space it would take up. margotbean (talk) 03:10, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. Maybe a short text explanation would be helpful, then? Or a table of number of harvests when planting on Spring 1 with different fertilizers? Some crops have notes about whether quality fertilizer or Speed-Gro are optimal when ignoring processing. I feel like a little additional info here would be helpful to readers looking to increase their profits. Bladeoflight16 (talk) 16:45, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

I think it allows readers to more quickly see and understand what the text is saying. Even if it's possible to figure it out from the text, this calendar makes it more intuitive. --TexasDex (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)