Talk:Artifact Spot - Revision history

imported>JackBlack69: /* Random or seeded? */

2026-02-19T08:59:41Z

Random or seeded?

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:59, 19 February 2026
Line 66:		Line 66:

	The current wiki article states that spawning and despawning of artifact spots is random (not seeded). I noticed on a seeded run I'm doing that when I went back and replayed several days, I ended up getting the same artifact spot spawn. I tested this multiple times with the same results. I also tested this on a different seed, and on both legacy and non-legacy RNG. In every case I got artifact spots to spawn in the same location and day, and to despawn on the same day. I don't know how to look into the code to verify, but it seems that artifact spawn and despawn is in fact seeded, although influenced by things like number of artifact spawns already present. Perhaps this is a change in 1.6? [[User:Pigtesting123\|Pigtesting123]] ([[User talk:Pigtesting123\|talk]]) 17:58, 9 February 2026 (UTC)		The current wiki article states that spawning and despawning of artifact spots is random (not seeded). I noticed on a seeded run I'm doing that when I went back and replayed several days, I ended up getting the same artifact spot spawn. I tested this multiple times with the same results. I also tested this on a different seed, and on both legacy and non-legacy RNG. In every case I got artifact spots to spawn in the same location and day, and to despawn on the same day. I don't know how to look into the code to verify, but it seems that artifact spawn and despawn is in fact seeded, although influenced by things like number of artifact spawns already present. Perhaps this is a change in 1.6? [[User:Pigtesting123\|Pigtesting123]] ([[User talk:Pigtesting123\|talk]]) 17:58, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

			:Generally if it says random, without any qualification it is likely seeded. The only time I can see on the page that it mentions it isn't seeded is the removal. However, even that appears to be seeded. The way to check is to first find where they spawn. This is in GameLocation::spawnObjects, which itself is called by GameLocation::DayUpdate, which itself is called by Game1::_newDayAfterFade. The key random calls here are:
			:*while (r.NextDouble() < chanceForNewArtifactAttempt)
			:*int xCoord = r.Next(this.map.DisplayWidth / 64);
			:*int yCoord = r.Next(this.map.DisplayHeight / 64);
			:All of these use the random number generator r.
			:This is created by Random r = Utility.CreateDaySaveRandom(). This creates a seeded random number generator, seeded by the number of days played and the unique id (game seed) for the game. So if you replay a few days, in the same way, you get the same spawns.
			:
			:The sole distinction between the legacy and new randomisation is how it makes the final seed. The old method adds the numbers together and finds the remainder, while the new one calculates a complicated hash. [[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 08:59, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

imported>Pigtesting123: /* Random or seeded? */ new section

2026-02-09T17:58:39Z

Random or seeded?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:58, 9 February 2026
Line 62:		Line 62:
	:As daily luck ranges from -0.1 at one extreme to 0.1 + 0.025 from the lucky charm at the other extreme, that makes luckMod range from 0.9 to 1.125.		:As daily luck ranges from -0.1 at one extreme to 0.1 + 0.025 from the lucky charm at the other extreme, that makes luckMod range from 0.9 to 1.125.
	:This gives the lower end as 0.90.9 = 0.81%, and the upper end as 0.91.125 = 1.0125%. Rounding to 1 decimal place that is 0.8 to 1.0%[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 07:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)		:This gives the lower end as 0.90.9 = 0.81%, and the upper end as 0.91.125 = 1.0125%. Rounding to 1 decimal place that is 0.8 to 1.0%[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 07:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

			== Random or seeded? ==

			The current wiki article states that spawning and despawning of artifact spots is random (not seeded). I noticed on a seeded run I'm doing that when I went back and replayed several days, I ended up getting the same artifact spot spawn. I tested this multiple times with the same results. I also tested this on a different seed, and on both legacy and non-legacy RNG. In every case I got artifact spots to spawn in the same location and day, and to despawn on the same day. I don't know how to look into the code to verify, but it seems that artifact spawn and despawn is in fact seeded, although influenced by things like number of artifact spawns already present. Perhaps this is a change in 1.6? [[User:Pigtesting123\|Pigtesting123]] ([[User talk:Pigtesting123\|talk]]) 17:58, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

imported>JackBlack69: /* 1.6 update */

2025-11-12T09:01:50Z

1.6 update

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:01, 12 November 2025
Line 48:		Line 48:
	:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)		:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
	::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)		::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

			I know it has been a while, but I have gone through and double checked all the chances. Happy to share the excel spreadsheet I used if anyone wants to double check my work. If we are happy with it, the stub flag can be removed. [[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 09:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

	== Golden Animal Crackers ==		== Golden Animal Crackers ==

imported>Margotbean: Undo revision 186594 by BiggerNDumber (talk) don't delete discussions

2025-05-23T00:22:47Z

Undo revision 186594 by BiggerNDumber (talk) don't delete discussions

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:22, 23 May 2025
Line 48:		Line 48:
	:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)		:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
	::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)		::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

			== Golden Animal Crackers ==

			Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.[[User:BiggerNDumber\|BiggerNDumber]] ([[User talk:BiggerNDumber\|talk]]) 03:49, 22 May 2025‎ (UTC)
			:I looked at the code and the chance is (still) 0.009 multiplied by 1 + Daily Luck. Since Daily Luck ranges from -0.1 to 0.125, 0.8% to 1.0% is correct. [[User:User314159\|User314159]] ([[User talk:User314159\|talk]]) 07:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

			:Note: User314159 typed reply while writing this, but still wanted to post for completeness.
			:I'm not sure how you got those numbers. You appear to have the chance go from half to double. But that isn't how the code works.
			:Looking at the code, the function trySpawnRareObject is called by digUpArtifactSpot, specifically as: <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>Utility.trySpawnRareObject(who, tilePixelPos, this, 9.0, 1.0, -1, r);</syntaxhighlight> Importantly, this sets changeModifer to 9. Then inside the function luckMod is then set to <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>1.0 + who.team.AverageDailyLuck() * dailyLuckWeight</syntaxhighlight> It then checks for spawning with a chance of <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>0.001 * chanceModifier * luckMod</syntaxhighlight>
			:This does give the base chance of 0.9%, however note that this has the chances being multiplicative, and luckMod is simply 1 plus the daily luck.
			:As daily luck ranges from -0.1 at one extreme to 0.1 + 0.025 from the lucky charm at the other extreme, that makes luckMod range from 0.9 to 1.125.
			:This gives the lower end as 0.90.9 = 0.81%, and the upper end as 0.91.125 = 1.0125%. Rounding to 1 decimal place that is 0.8 to 1.0%[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 07:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

imported>BiggerNDumber: /* Golden Animal Crackers */ I was being massively incorrect

2025-05-22T23:07:50Z

Golden Animal Crackers: I was being massively incorrect

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:07, 22 May 2025
Line 48:		Line 48:
	:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)		:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
	::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)		::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

	~~== Golden Animal Crackers ==~~

	Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.[[User:BiggerNDumber\|BiggerNDumber]] ([[User talk:BiggerNDumber\|talk]]) 03:49, 22 May 2025‎ (UTC)
	:I looked at the code and the chance is (still) 0.009 multiplied by 1 + Daily Luck. Since Daily Luck ranges from -0.1 to 0.125, 0.8% to 1.0% is correct. [[User:User314159\|User314159]] ([[User talk:User314159\|talk]]) 07:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

	~~:Note: User314159 typed reply while writing this, but still wanted to post for completeness.~~
	~~:I'm not sure how you got those numbers. You appear to have the chance go from half to double. But that isn't how the code works.~~
	:Looking at the code, the function trySpawnRareObject is called by digUpArtifactSpot, specifically as: <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>Utility.trySpawnRareObject(who, tilePixelPos, this, 9.0, 1.0, -1, r);</syntaxhighlight> Importantly, this sets changeModifer to 9. Then inside the function luckMod is then set to <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>1.0 + who.team.AverageDailyLuck() * dailyLuckWeight</syntaxhighlight> It then checks for spawning with a chance of <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>0.001 * chanceModifier * luckMod</syntaxhighlight>
	~~:This does give the base chance of 0.9%, however note that this has the chances being multiplicative, and luckMod is simply 1 plus the daily luck.~~
	~~:As daily luck ranges from -0.1 at one extreme to 0.1 + 0.025 from the lucky charm at the other extreme, that makes luckMod range from 0.9 to 1.125.~~
	:This gives the lower end as 0.90.9 = 0.81%, and the upper end as 0.91.125 = 1.0125%. Rounding to 1 decimal place that is 0.8 to 1.0%[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 07:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

imported>JackBlack69: /* Golden Animal Crackers */

2025-05-22T07:08:35Z

Golden Animal Crackers

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:08, 22 May 2025
Line 51:		Line 51:
	== Golden Animal Crackers ==		== Golden Animal Crackers ==

	Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.		Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.[[User:BiggerNDumber\|BiggerNDumber]] ([[User talk:BiggerNDumber\|talk]]) 03:49, 22 May 2025‎ (UTC)
	:I looked at the code and the chance is (still) 0.009 multiplied by 1 + Daily Luck. Since Daily Luck ranges from -0.1 to 0.125, 0.8% to 1.0% is correct. [[User:User314159\|User314159]] ([[User talk:User314159\|talk]]) 07:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)		:I looked at the code and the chance is (still) 0.009 multiplied by 1 + Daily Luck. Since Daily Luck ranges from -0.1 to 0.125, 0.8% to 1.0% is correct. [[User:User314159\|User314159]] ([[User talk:User314159\|talk]]) 07:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

			:Note: User314159 typed reply while writing this, but still wanted to post for completeness.
			:I'm not sure how you got those numbers. You appear to have the chance go from half to double. But that isn't how the code works.
			:Looking at the code, the function trySpawnRareObject is called by digUpArtifactSpot, specifically as: <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>Utility.trySpawnRareObject(who, tilePixelPos, this, 9.0, 1.0, -1, r);</syntaxhighlight> Importantly, this sets changeModifer to 9. Then inside the function luckMod is then set to <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>1.0 + who.team.AverageDailyLuck() * dailyLuckWeight</syntaxhighlight> It then checks for spawning with a chance of <syntaxhighlight lang=CSharp>0.001 * chanceModifier * luckMod</syntaxhighlight>
			:This does give the base chance of 0.9%, however note that this has the chances being multiplicative, and luckMod is simply 1 plus the daily luck.
			:As daily luck ranges from -0.1 at one extreme to 0.1 + 0.025 from the lucky charm at the other extreme, that makes luckMod range from 0.9 to 1.125.
			:This gives the lower end as 0.90.9 = 0.81%, and the upper end as 0.91.125 = 1.0125%. Rounding to 1 decimal place that is 0.8 to 1.0%[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 07:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

imported>User314159 at 07:04, 22 May 2025

2025-05-22T07:04:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:04, 22 May 2025
Line 52:		Line 52:

	Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.		Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.
			:I looked at the code and the chance is (still) 0.009 multiplied by 1 + Daily Luck. Since Daily Luck ranges from -0.1 to 0.125, 0.8% to 1.0% is correct. [[User:User314159\|User314159]] ([[User talk:User314159\|talk]]) 07:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

imported>BiggerNDumber: /* Golden Animal Crackers */ new section

2025-05-22T03:49:26Z

Golden Animal Crackers: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:49, 22 May 2025
Line 48:		Line 48:
	:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)		:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
	::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)		::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

			== Golden Animal Crackers ==

			Looking at the code, isn't the base chance 0.9% and the variable chance between 0.45% and 1.8% to get a cracker per artifact spot? I'm not seeing anything in either trySpawnRareObject or the call in digUpArtifactSpot that'd make it between 0.8% and 1.0%. I've done some testing in game but it's kinda inconclusive without a massive sample size.

imported>JackBlack69: /* 1.6 update */

2024-06-24T11:47:14Z

1.6 update

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 24 June 2024
Line 47:		Line 47:
	:Thank you for looking into all that! We can add a stub template to any sections where the percents might have changed. I think the code changes are a ''lot'' to look at, and it took about 5 years before anyone got the percentages correct in the first place, so don't feel that it has to be resolved quickly!		:Thank you for looking into all that! We can add a stub template to any sections where the percents might have changed. I think the code changes are a ''lot'' to look at, and it took about 5 years before anyone got the percentages correct in the first place, so don't feel that it has to be resolved quickly!
	:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)		:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
			::I had a quick look based on the current code. And threw it all in a giant Excel Spreadsheet. I think I have all the chances correct. Rather than add it all to the main page, I thought I would create a separate one here [[Artifact_Spot/Chances]], at least until 1.6.9 comes out. Looking at it, it appears the chances don't all match, so I updated the stub note at the top of the page (I think all the 1.6 drops are already added.)[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 11:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

imported>Margotbean at 15:33, 23 June 2024

2024-06-23T15:33:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:33, 23 June 2024
Line 45:		Line 45:
	Now, contrary to what the lost book ref says, it is the first thing checked, then artifacts, then snow yams, winter roots, Qi Beans, rice shoots, bone fragments, then the location specific items, then secret notes, warm totems and finally clay.		Now, contrary to what the lost book ref says, it is the first thing checked, then artifacts, then snow yams, winter roots, Qi Beans, rice shoots, bone fragments, then the location specific items, then secret notes, warm totems and finally clay.
	I'm not sure how much chances are impacted, and if they have changed at all, as there are a lot of numbers, which vary between different locations and conditions.[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 09:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)		I'm not sure how much chances are impacted, and if they have changed at all, as there are a lot of numbers, which vary between different locations and conditions.[[User:JackBlack69\|JackBlack69]] ([[User talk:JackBlack69\|talk]]) 09:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
			:Thank you for looking into all that! We can add a stub template to any sections where the percents might have changed. I think the code changes are a ''lot'' to look at, and it took about 5 years before anyone got the percentages correct in the first place, so don't feel that it has to be resolved quickly!
			:There is also v1.6.9 coming, and it might (maybe, maybe not) involve a complete refactor of the game code. So updating references for v1.6.8 may be wasted work. I do appreciate your dedication to making the wiki accurate for artifact spots!! If you put it on the back burner, so to speak, and come back to it when you want to do a project, that would be incredible too! If not, your work is appreciated. Thank you, [[User:Margotbean\|margotbean]] ([[User talk:Margotbean\|talk]]) 15:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC)