Skip to content

Halve the Artifact Recovery time modifier to 100 - #15

Open
XxFran10xX wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/faster-artifact-mine
Open

XxFran10xX wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/faster-artifact-mine

Conversation

@XxFran10xX

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Halves the Artifact Recovery (artifact_focus) time modifier from 200 to 100. This ships the value now live on TFMCMain01.

Artifacts gate the mage class: a player's resonance can't rise above the aura of the artifacts in their meditation circle. The artifact focus was the only artifact source on the live server, and it produced about one artifact per 16.6 hours on a typical level 3 node with diamond tools at 100% efficiency.

time_modifier Hours per artifact (typical node) Fastest node (mythril, 2 per cycle)
200 (before) 16.6 5.8
100 (now) 12.6 3.8

At 100, a guild's mages reach tier I in 1–2 days and the full tier IV kit in about 1–1.5 weeks. This assumes the Magic tier bands from the companion Magic PR.

The bundled artifact_focus still differs from the live entry in its name, upkeep and drop odds. Those are left as they are.

Testing

  • No unit test asserts this value; CI runs the full suite.
  • Live on TFMCMain01 since 2026-10-05 20:50 UTC through dowsing reload (routine PUSH). The reload ran with no errors.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

The mage class depends on artifacts, and the artifact focus was the slowest
magic node: a typical level 3 diamond-tool node took about 16.6 hours per
artifact. At 100 it takes about 12.6 hours. Mythril and abyssalite tools
still double the yield, so the fastest nodes stay near 4 hours.

Matches the live TFMCMain01 value set on 2026-10-05.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 5, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review in Change Stack →

Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius.

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration
  • Configuration used: Organization UI
  • Review profile: CHILL
  • Plan: Advanced
  • Run ID: 8042d9df-a7ae-495d-b5e7-44a4cf015028
📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ebe582e and e17d5b8.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/main/resources/production_methods.yml

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 10 included reviews per hour; 6 remain after this review.


📝 Summary

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Gameplay Balance
    • Artifact Focus’s time modifier is reduced from 200 to 100. Its other effects and cost remain unchanged; this is the only listed adjustment to the item in this update.

Walkthrough

The artifact_focus production method now uses a time modifier of 100 instead of 200. Its other effects and cost are unchanged.

Changes

Artifact Focus

Layer / File(s) Summary
Update artifact focus time modifier
src/main/resources/production_methods.yml
artifact_focus now applies time_modifier(100) instead of time_modifier(200). Its other effects and cost are unchanged.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Change: Other

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to e17d5

Artifact Focus cycles use the revised time modifier, with the existing countdown unchanged. No actionable merge-blocking risk is evidenced.

Architecture Summary

Architecture risk: 🔵 Low · up to e17d5

The change affects 1 system.

Changed systems: src

Architecture concerns
No architecture-level concerns identified.

Review details

Systems and components

  • observed — src (service) was modified; 1 changed file maps to changed impact.

Before / after behavior

  • observed — Modified behavior in src/main/resources/production_methods.yml: artifact_focus now applies time_modifier(100) instead of time_modifier(200).
  • Autopilot · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant