Talk:List of Berries by growth time
Growth Time w/Mulches
Last time I checked, the mulches don't make it so that it takes twice as less/more time, but rather, 3/4th or 5/4th the amount of time respectively. I lost my notes on this, so confirmation would be appreciated. - System Error 08:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, after some inspection of my Lum Berries, I do think that's the case. I only wish they'd made it a little more clear in-game... stupid vague "raises" and "lowers" stuff... BY HOW MUCH!? Jeez, I wanna use a Wide Lens, but how MUCH does it raise accuracy by?
- Anyway, I'm fixing it now. TTEchidnaGSDS! 08:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Drying time.
It looks like we may need to add to add a "drying time" for generation IV, growing berries the other day it seems that each individual berry has it's own "drying time" which doesn't always match it's growth time. some berries I've tried dry the soil by a step at the moment they reach the first growth stage, some others dry the soil sooner. Some may even dry slower than they grow.
But, it seems berries with the same growth times can have different drying times. I was growing tomato and sitrus, the tomato dried out faster. Research is needed, I'll do what i can, starting with checking each berry to see whether it's growth time matches, or is slower/faster than it's growth time. from there we can work on narrowing down the drying times that aren't in synch with the growth.
that way the first step is simple as planting berries, then showing up before they sprout to see if it's already dry before sprouting, it dries out when it sprouts, or if it stays moist even after the plant has sprouted. Kendai 15:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- I just finished checking the first eight berries, all of them seem to have a drying time of four hours. For Leppa, Oran, and Pirmism, this matches growth time, for the others it means they dry out one hour slower than it takes them to sprout. Kendai 15:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Berries 11-20 tested, all of them match thier respective growth times Kendai 20:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Growing Time Calculation
I can't figure out how the game calculates time in relation to berry growth. I thought it was play-time, but this doesn't explain why you can turn on the game and find a tree from a berry you planted right before you turned it off. I thought it might be the DS's internal clock, but this also proved to be false when I tried to time-warp to quickly grow berries. Does anyone know how this works? Kraslev 20:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
This page should include Berry yield
I made a page for List of Berries by growth stats, which includes both growth time and Berry yield. I've always been interested in the yield I can expect when I've wanted to know the growth time, so I finally put together a page that has both pieces of data together.
IMO that page should replace this one. (Delete this and mainspace that, or move this and then copy that over it, idk...whatever works.) Thoughts? Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
- I do like the idea of yield being presented as well, what worries me though is the amount of unknown data in the table, which isn't a reason to not merge it though. I also dislike the grouping of time and yield if two connecting cells have the same data, it decreases readability a lot for me. --Spriteit (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Repeating all those numbers really goes against the grain for me, but I'll separate them if that's the only thing that works for you... But is it actually that format that's a problem for you, or might it just be the colors, with the light blue "borders" being hard to distinguish? I changed it so they're black now; is that readable enough to you? Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:01, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- It isn't sorting correctly for me. Without sorting, it's harder to use the table. --Abcboy (talk) 02:18, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sort counts a cell spanning multiple columns as only one cell, in the column it starts in... (I think I've run into this before, too.) Should be sorting fine now. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:48, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- Working okay now. Can you make it so the blank cells sort after instead of before when sorting? --Abcboy (talk) 02:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not always (afaik)... They can be "low" or "high" (or even somewhere in between). I suppose I should probably make them default to the "high" end, though...right? (It's low priority, so I'll just do it whenever I decide to futz around with the other bits of the table later.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:04, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- It may be asking a "lot" of users (relatively speaking), but I realized that if you sort the table, merged cells are automatically split up. So if you still don't like the merged cells, if you just sort the No. row, the table will stay the same and all the cells will get their own "borders". Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:16, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not always (afaik)... They can be "low" or "high" (or even somewhere in between). I suppose I should probably make them default to the "high" end, though...right? (It's low priority, so I'll just do it whenever I decide to futz around with the other bits of the table later.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:04, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- Working okay now. Can you make it so the blank cells sort after instead of before when sorting? --Abcboy (talk) 02:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sort counts a cell spanning multiple columns as only one cell, in the column it starts in... (I think I've run into this before, too.) Should be sorting fine now. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:48, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- It isn't sorting correctly for me. Without sorting, it's harder to use the table. --Abcboy (talk) 02:18, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- Repeating all those numbers really goes against the grain for me, but I'll separate them if that's the only thing that works for you... But is it actually that format that's a problem for you, or might it just be the colors, with the light blue "borders" being hard to distinguish? I changed it so they're black now; is that readable enough to you? Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:01, 26 April 2014 (UTC)