Talk:Fish Pond

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

Fish Disappearing

I threw 5 Sturgeon into a pond that was just build, or I thought I did anyway. I walked up to the pond and opened my inventory by hitting Esc. Then I grabbed the sturgeon and clicked off the inventory. All of them disappeared into the pond with a splash but then they were gone. So much wasted fishing time. Ekztal (talk) 15:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

You can only hold the sturgeon on your hand (instead of opening inventory) and then right click the fish pond to throw them into the pond. What you did was throwing them out of your inventory, but you were near water at that time. It equals to throwing them into the river/sea instead of the fish pond. This is why you heard the splash but the fishes were gone. Besides, the initial capacity of a fish pond for rare fishes (like sturgeon) is only one fish. Horizon98 (talk) 16:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I will update the page to be more clear about what "holding the fish" means. So sorry that happened to you. margotbean (talk) 17:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Fish pond full reproduction

I found that if a fish pind has reached its max population and spent a period in which it was able to reproduce once while it was was full (10 fishs). Then if one or more fishs are removed than the fish pond will immediately reproduce next day. Void farmer (talk) 20:41, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's true. Also, if you fill a fish pond to its current max capacity with caught fish, you still have to wait the full number of days it would take the pond to produce them. These might be interesting trivia points to add to the page. margotbean (talk) 18:20, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Add icons within the tables

Hello there. I see that there have been recurring attempts to add icons to the tables (six in total), including ones using the {{name}} template, each time reversed by the admin Margotbean.

However, no proper discussion have been ever opened in this very page, even if it would have made easier to follow the debate on the subject, instead of disseminating it on various talk pages.

So for the future, I'm pointing out the two last discussions I know about:

To sum things up, there are two main arguments I've read preventing the use of the {{name}} template, but I personally do not think they stand out if dealt with properly:

First, about the very opportunity of using {{name}} template: does it increase or decrease readability?

Opponents: Margotbean seems to think it's not such an improvement ("I think it makes certain sections of the table less readable", I quote).
Proponents: I personally think that would be a big improvement and that the table is very uneasy to read without any icons. That was more or less the argument of Artoftheblue when proposing his change ("I found that it's very difficult to search for the required fish otherwise", I quote). I think that the recurrence of spontaneous attempts pleads in the same direction. Incidentally, I've asked some other Stardew Valley players that I know personally what they thought about this, and they agreed on the idea that icons increase rather than decrease readability on this case. I've also came across the OldSchool Runescape Wiki (which is reputable on the internet) and noticed they make an extensive use of icons.

> If that's really an issue, I think it would be nice to have a vote of some sort to settle the question.

Second, in non-English language wikis, using the {{name}} template breaks up the sorting, as the English name is used to sort instead of the wiki-language name.

> Nonetheless, this can be easily worked around by using the data-sort-value cell property, e.g. | data-sort-value="Fischlaich" | {{name|Roe}}.

I may miss some other arguments, but I think it would be nice to take those elements into account in the future, to avoid further attempts-reversions on this topic.

For the sake of the history, here are the six previous attempts:

There also have been attempts through the years in non-English language wikis (German, Spanish, French, Korean).

I finally point out that the two tables with icons are also available on this user page by Artoftheblue.

Cheers,

-- Charly (talk) 07:28, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

I would definitely support the change, and I agree with the view that it would greatly improve the page's readability. Frankly, it feels a little inappropriate to have improvements to the page, seemingly supported by most of the community, overruled by a single admin. -- Starfarmer (talk) 21:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I second the change. I think at least adding icons to each of the fish could help with the readability. If there have been already so many attempts to make the change and other similar pages already have icons (see Fish), it should be more than enough reason to make the change -- Lysdexic (talk) 19:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I'd support the change as well. I was actually about to create a discussion thread about it here before seeing that one was already made, lol Myirlname (talk) 10:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

The link to Starfarmer's discussion about the icons was lost, here it is from September 2023.

Notably, Starfarmer offered to do the "cascading" changes into other languages themself, both the icons and the proper sorting. Margotbean declined without further elaboration, although the amount of changes was given as a reason before.

The current table is unusable without Ctrl-F (search hotkey). Sorting is broken for English too. By default the table is not sorted at all, but "The fish appear in the same order as in the Fish Pond data file. Please keep it like that.". And if you want it sorted by Fish name? Click once on the column, it is sorted in descending order. Except that the sorted fish are first grouped by their requested items. Therefore, at the very top, sorted under letter "A" are the following fish: Albacore, Halibut, Red Mullet ... Tilapia. Yes, "T" is sorted next to A, before Anchovy (next entry).

Expectation? The grouping would only be possible IFF the fish names follow one another directly && required items are equal, i.e. only Red Mullet + Red Snapper. But Mediawiki cannot split such manually grouped entries, so... the sorting is actually useless given the table size. Out of 106 rows, 19 fish entries are sorted incorrectly. Emphasis: nearly 20%.

If there is an option to add an interactive search field as part of the table, it would be more useful than the current sorting. // vad (talk) 03:23, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Legend and Legend 2 on fishpond

So the wiki sayst that there's a 43% chance for a Legend tro produce 1 roe and 57% to produce nothing on a fishpond. However I noticed that the fishpond can produce up to 5 roe on a single day, 2 roe being more common. The code confirms that the max produce is 1, but there's a "default" legendary fish that can produce 2, though the chances are different. i dont understand why it can produce more roe. Can you please explain to me if it's a hidden mechanic that I dont know about and if it is shouldn't it be more clear on the wiki, being on the drop chances for example? (Follows the code for the chance of the Legend fish and "Default" Legendary fish.

{
        "RequiredPopulation": 0,
        "Chance": 0.43,
        "Precedence": 0,
        "Condition": "ITEM_ID Input (O)163 (O)900",
        "Id": "Legend",
        "ItemId": "(O)812",
        "RandomItemId": null,
        "MaxItems": null,
        "MinStack": 1,
        "MaxStack": 1,
        "Quality": -1,
        "ObjectInternalName": null,
        "ObjectDisplayName": null,
        "ObjectColor": null,
        "ToolUpgradeLevel": -1,
        "IsRecipe": false,
        "StackModifiers": null,
        "StackModifierMode": "Stack",
        "QualityModifiers": null,
        "QualityModifierMode": "Stack",
        "ModData": null,
        "PerItemCondition": null
      },
      {
        "RequiredPopulation": 0,
        "Chance": 0.5,
        "Precedence": 100,
        "Condition": null,
        "Id": "Default",
        "ItemId": "(O)812",
        "RandomItemId": null,
        "MaxItems": null,
        "MinStack": 1,
        "MaxStack": 2,
        "Quality": -1,
        "ObjectInternalName": null,
        "ObjectDisplayName": null,
        "ObjectColor": null,
        "ToolUpgradeLevel": -1,
        "IsRecipe": false,
        "StackModifiers": null,
        "StackModifierMode": "Stack",
        "QualityModifiers": null,
        "QualityModifierMode": "Stack",
        "ModData": null,
        "PerItemCondition": null
      }

Klytos (talk) 16:19, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I set up 10 fish ponds with the Legend and nine Legend II and wrote down for almost a year how much roe they would produce. The overall chance to produce anything was about 36 %. When they produced it was on average 1.467 roe. I got about 62.6 % of the time one roe, 29.4 % two roe, 6.6 % three roe and 1.4 % four roe. That means the description on the page can't be correct. If the pond would produce max one roe it would be about 80 % one roe, 16 % two roe and so on. The distribution I got is an almost exact overlay of an 80 % chance for one roe with the loop for additional roe and a 20 % chance for two roe with the loop for additional roe. The latest changelog states that the production was increased. So I guess the information here is not up to date. Bitterulf (talk) 20:15, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

I had a browse through the code because I too was confused about this, and I've found the solution. For all legendary fish, the 'Default' legend fish will be rolled if the initial roll fails, so in the case of the Legend and Legend II, the game rolls the 50% chance to generate anything at all, then the 43% chance to generate 1 roe if that succeeds. If the 43% fails then the 50% chance for the 'Default' pool will be ran, which can have either 1 or 2 roe, then the 20% rolling chance to add roe. This creates that overlay of two distributions you talked about as if a roe is generated then after all these processes there is roughly a 80.07% one roe was generated and a 19.93% chance two were generated, then the 20% rolling chance to add to that runs. this also explains why something was generated 36% of the time rather than the supposed 21.5 (statistical value is 35.75% of the time you will get something). In light of this someone should update the wiki accurately describe this process. --Explodingpineapple64 (talk) 11:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi! What is the code reference (or references) for the above analysis? margotbean (talk) 14:54, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

In illspy im looking at Stardewvalley.Buildings/Fishpond/GetFishProduce(Random) and for the loot table shown by the first user in this thread is found in the game files at Stardew Valley/Content/Data/FishPondData --Explodingpineapple64 (talk) 07:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok, I had a look through the code, and I have determined that adding the percentages is beyond what I can do right now. I've unprotected the page, so please feel free to add this info! margotbean (talk) 16:48, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Duplicated Golden Animal Cracker explanation in summary

"A Golden Animal Cracker can be thrown into the fish pond to double its output." is repeated in free flow text although just above, as a bullet point: "Golden Animal Cracker, once per Fish Pond to double the fish pond's output of its normal product". One of them should be removed, it's a duplicate. // vad (talk) 03:25, 9 March 2026 (UTC)