feat(balance): Rebalance Tree Spawns

[RobbieNeko]

Checklist

Required

• I wrote the PR title in conventional commit format.
• I ran the code formatter.
• I linked any relevant issues using github keyword syntax so it can be closed automatically.
• I have committed my changes to new branch that isn't main so it won't cause conflict when updating main branch later.

Purpose of change

It has been noted that after #4399 and #4405 , foraging has been kind of meh. In particular, I noticed a dramatic spam in dead trees and elm trees. This attempts to remedy the issues I see with the approach in those PRs while also aiming for a compromise between how they currently are and how they were.

Describe the solution

• Greatly reduces elm spawn rate
• Slightly increase t_tree, reverts changes to fruit trees
• Slightly reduce pine numbers
• Slightly reduce dead tree spam

Describe alternatives you've considered

• Go for a more aggressive approach closer to how they were before aforementioned PRs

I'm still tempted tbh, not entirely sure I'm happy with the current results.

• Completely revert the PRs

Feels unnecessary, and to be fair nut foraging was very good before.

Testing

Before this PR (aka with the 2 aforementioned PRs):

After:

World is as default as can be, and the world was "reset" for the purposes of regenerating in order to get the After images.

Additional context

Input is highly appreciated!

[chaosvolt]

Ehhh, to be honest this is one Viss PR I'm okay with. Bushes and trees are plenty common even after that PR. Granted, the changes in this aren't THAT severe so it's probably fine either way.

[RoyalFox2140]

I was fine with the pre-nerf values as they were, so I'm in favor of this, key highlights of the problem is that:

1. At the current odds for fruit trees relative to all others, they are effectively lost content
2. Mobile users will have to generate a huge amount of forest to survive, generation effects everyone but it barely affects PC users.
3. Most trees being elm limits biodiversity in a very strange way. It feels off.

[RobbieNeko]

Main thing I'm doing is cutting dramatically back on the elms because 256 was a very high number for a single random tree type.

Also, everything except pine in terms of food trees felt super rare to me? So I'm still not entirely sure I don't want to bump them back up a bit more, but definitely NEVER going back to pre-nerf t_tree values thanks to those acorns. I'm aiming for compromise / a middle ground.

[chaosvolt]

¯\(ツ)/¯

[yay855]

I'd personally cut back the pine tree spawns a little, they feel kind of common and they're a bit stronger than other food trees and bushes thanks to spawning their high-calorie 'fruit' once a season instead of one season a year. Other than that, it seems good to me.

[RobbieNeko]

Also valid, it's a bit weird how their bit of the distribution actually got buffed with the prior PRs while the rest of the nuts went down