Java (In)consistent randomise options

[99th_DutchVoid]

Current situation
The loot menus for a lot of loot types (Arrow Trail, Balloon, Banner, Cage, Shield, Trail, Hat, Miniature and Win Effect) have received the 'Randomise' option in late May 2021 to select a random item from that loot type for you. This can be (de)activated by clicking the dice in the loot menu:

This randomise option, of course, already existed for a longer time for the Egg Break Messages, but there it is just one of the many selectable options:

Desired situation
It's not intuitive to have to search for the randomise option for Egg Break Messages, because it's somewhere among the other Egg Break Messages. That's why I'm suggesting to add the Randomise dice to the Egg Break Messages loot menu as well.

Please react with Agree if you agree with this suggestion. If you disagree with this suggestion or are unsure about it, please leave a comment as well, I would love to get some feedback about this idea.
Thanks for reading my 100th forum post and have a nice day!
~99th_DutchVoid

 

[99th_DutchVoid]

@xAmazinq I'm curious why you disagreed, would you mind giving a (short) explanation? Thanks

 

[Fesa]

They are by nature different.
The Egg break msg one chooses a different one every time you break an egg.
The others, every time you change server.

I assume it's thus not as simple as adding the stuff in a config file. While this might seem handy, it's not needed in any way.
Since the last QOL update broke half the server. Let's not add stuff to QOL that's this useless since it's actually already a thing

 

[JokeKaedee]

I was thinking about writing a similar suggestion lmao, thank you!!
It might not be easy to make but still nice to see ig c:

 

[Amazinq]

@xAmazinq I'm curious why you disagreed, would you mind giving a (short) explanation? Thanks

I disagree since to get a lot of egg break messages, you have to have played a lot and by now you will have realized that there is already a function that allows you to randomize them.
You said it's not intuitive to find this function, but actually people who have obtained several egg break messages already know about this function.
New players really don't need this feature as they don't have any/or few egg break messages, that's why I think your idea is quite unnecessary and useless

 

[99th_DutchVoid]

They are by nature different.
(...)
The others, every time you change server.

I partially disagree, the shields have had a bug for a long time where they'd change every time you would move them in chests/your inventory.

I assume it's thus not as simple as adding the stuff in a config file.

No, but the system for it is al already in place for the other loot items. If properly coded, it's a case of removing the 'Randomise' paper and adding the dice-logic here as well.

Since the last QOL update broke half the server. Let's not add stuff to QOL that's this useless since it's actually already a thing

I agree that recent updates seemed to bring more destruction than good. But that's a reason to have a good look at the QA/testing track before pushing updating to production, rather than stopping to improve or create new things...

I disagree since to get a lot of egg break messages, you have to have played a lot and by now you will have realized that there is already a function that allows you to randomize them.
You said it's not intuitive to find this function, but actually people who have obtained several egg break messages already know about this function.
New players really don't need this feature as they don't have any/or few egg break messages, that's why I think your idea is quite unnecessary and useless

I don't think "experienced players already know how it works, so we should keep it this way" is a good argument from any UX point of view. I just don't see the need to keep the old system in place for Egg Break Messages, if there's a different, more usable system for all the other loot menus that have the option.

 

[99th_DutchScary]

~ Forwarded!

 

[Marieke2001]

Hello 99th_DutchVoid,

The server team discussed your suggestion, and we agreed that this is a minor inconsistency.

We feel as though this will be a small but worthwhile change, which is why we will be looking into implementing this!