sheesh calm down, was just a thought. Not like it would be bad thing to have more of them. Heavens know the game population isnt what it used to be, but it seems any ideas or suggestions to adjust or give solutions to it are immediately shot down by players afraid of change (or simply to shoot something down).
Metathesiophobia (noun) - The persistent, abnormal, and unwarranted fear of change.
It's not a fear of change, it's a disagreement with whether the change is warranted. Brewing was given to bards, and it would cheapen it if everyone had it.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
Also, I'm not sure that I like more people running around with enhanced/stacked alcohol tolerance and puke (freeze ground clone). Dmp already is kinda crazy round these parts.
It wouldn't be a problem having archetype-restricted trades if tradeskills were more friendly to use across the board. Brewmeister is one of the less painful trades out there, and according to everyone's opinion, it gives a lot of benefits that would make it very lucrative to pick up for anyone who can do so... and there are still occasional gripes about the difficulty in getting a hold of one.
The Lusternian trade scape, with the unwieldy-ness of its patterns, design access and everything else, has always been something of a pet-peeve for me. Not to mention the cartel system, which seems intent on gouging out extra costs (of buying clans and of clan-slots) from players. I'd say the only thing that rivals or is worse than the current Lusternian trade mess system is old-school Achaea/Aetolia trade system, back when they used what was called the "paper design" system, where people had to lug around huge inventory lists of design items in order to craft. Now that they have overhauled those systems (have they? I think they have, can't remember) though, Lusternia has claimed that top spot for most infuriating trade system amongst the IREs.
I'm not saying we need to go the full way around and do what Imperian did with their ability to let people list designs in shops and only create items as and when they are bought, but hey, something to alleviate these occasional, but clearly problematic complaints about the lack of trade-people for certain trades should certainly be considered, especially if we want to continue to maintain an archetype-restricted trade system. If not increasing the availability of the trades itself, then decreasing the hair-raising costs or the pure, stroke-inducing, infuriating hassle of the trades would go a long way.
I'm actually enjoying Imperian's layout system, where you design something and sell the pattern in shops, and people pay to customise the items they already have with your pattern.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
I just have one caveat with that: Combat skills need to be removed from trades. Those skills that enhance combat for the user only, or disproportionately more for the trades-person than consumers should be phased out. These are things such as transitems/skill (splendors, immunity, philosopher's stone, trans-tattoo-armor, puke, irongut), which create a pressure on players not interested in a trade but who are interested in competitive pvp to purchase a skillset they will not use the overriding bulk of. This both skews the combat meta and waters down RP: I am a tailor not because I have any interest in tailoring as a player or character, but because I want splendors.
I like the idea of segregating trade skills, in the way that Aetolia did, in three groups:
-Mercantile skills: These are your herbs/alchemy/poisons type skills, that have no creative element and are used primarily for generating coin, nothing else. Everyone gets access to one of these (Though choice is somewhat restricted), and you can only have one active at a time. They cost full lessons.
-Trade Skills: These are the bulk of the 'design skills', like tailoring, cooking, bookbinding, and so on. You can have as many of these as you want, but you have to pay a small (in comparison to the cost of a full skillset from scratch) credit fee to unlock any given trade, but once you have a trade... you can make every item of that trade, though more lessons put in increases durability etc, and having trans gives you some perks. The credit cost of getting a trade skill is balanced out by the fact that these skillsets are miniskills, taking half the normal number of lessons to learn (so, ~860).
-Talents: These are minor crafting-type skills that don't deserve a full skillset, because they produce items... but typically don't have a design process, or generate only a very small range of item types. They cost credits to buy, but no lessons can be spent in them at all, you get what you buy.
Allowing people to have more than one crafting skill active without jumping through a huge number of hoops would be a really good move, and introducing something like talents would open the door to a lot of interesting mini-design skills that don't easily fit into the other tradeskills. Imagine being able to do a quest at Claramore and pay some credits to learn a perfumer talent? Cool.
Beyond that, I also agree that the cartel and design reviewing system is clunky and costly, both in player resources and admin resources, the other games seem to get along just fine with less central control over designs. Any player with a particular skill can pay a moderate gold fee to join the review board for designs of that trade, drastically increasing the pool of available reviewers, and empowering crafters to make unique - and used designs.
I just have one caveat with that: Combat skills need to be removed from trades. Those skills that enhance combat for the user only, or disproportionately more for the trades-person than consumers should be phased out. These are things such as transitems/skill (splendors, immunity, philosopher's stone, trans-tattoo-armor, puke, irongut), which create a pressure on players not interested in a trade but who are interested in competitive pvp to purchase a skillset they will not use the overriding bulk of. This both skews the combat meta and waters down RP: I am a tailor not because I have any interest in tailoring as a player or character, but because I want splendors.
I like the idea of segregating trade skills, in the way that Aetolia did, in three groups:
-Mercantile skills: These are your herbs/alchemy/poisons type skills, that have no creative element and are used primarily for generating coin, nothing else. Everyone gets access to one of these (Though choice is somewhat restricted), and you can only have one active at a time. They cost full lessons.
-Trade Skills: These are the bulk of the 'design skills', like tailoring, cooking, bookbinding, and so on. You can have as many of these as you want, but you have to pay a small (in comparison to the cost of a full skillset from scratch) credit fee to unlock any given trade, but once you have a trade... you can make every item of that trade, though more lessons put in increases durability etc, and having trans gives you some perks. The credit cost of getting a trade skill is balanced out by the fact that these skillsets are miniskills, taking half the normal number of lessons to learn (so, ~860).
-Talents: These are minor crafting-type skills that don't deserve a full skillset, because they produce items... but typically don't have a design process, or generate only a very small range of item types. They cost credits to buy, but no lessons can be spent in them at all, you get what you buy.
Allowing people to have more than one crafting skill active without jumping through a huge number of hoops would be a really good move, and introducing something like talents would open the door to a lot of interesting mini-design skills that don't easily fit into the other tradeskills. Imagine being able to do a quest at Claramore and pay some credits to learn a perfumer talent? Cool.
Beyond that, I also agree that the cartel and design reviewing system is clunky and costly, both in player resources and admin resources, the other games seem to get along just fine with less central control over designs. Any player with a particular skill can pay a moderate gold fee to join the review board for designs of that trade, drastically increasing the pool of available reviewers, and empowering crafters to make unique - and used designs.
That trades lead to an artifact is one of the reasons I played Lusternia and I think it is a draw for other IRE players...that I can get an artifact in the course of learning a skill.
I think it would be much harder to find someone with a trade.
I still think the reasons people have problems are mainly being picky, cheap, and not being specific about what they want (which you could also add, failing to plan ahead).
Really? I still get the impression that for the majority of Lusternians, trade skills are seen as either cash-cows (in the case of the mercantile-type), as a way of gaining slight convenience in making items you use frequently yourself, or as a means to a combat end. People who are truly interested in crafting and making a name for themselves that way are discouraged by the large sea of people who don't care.. but also have those trade skills.
Really? I still get the impression that for the majority of Lusternians, trade skills are seen as either cash-cows (in the case of the mercantile-type), as a way of gaining slight convenience in making items you use frequently yourself, or as a means to a combat end. People who are truly interested in crafting and making a name for themselves that way are discouraged by the large sea of people who don't care.. but also have those trade skills.
How are designers discouraged by the people who have the skills but don't care? Just because I know tailoring doesn't mean I'm discouraging anyone else from designing their own robes or clothing......
Are you likely to use their services to get clothes they design, being a tailor - presumably using splendors, that you yourself have to make? Are you likely to have a compelling want or need for a coat or cloak of particular special design, that you couldn't just make yourself for convenience?
What's discouraging about designing is that I'm likely never gonna be able to make what I design.
Seriously though. The complaint about customers being unspecific with what they want is really unfair towards the customer, because the average customer has no idea what's available. If I want a robe, I've no way to figure out if you do, in fact, have a black swanskin robe with a low hemline and a rope belt, but hoping that you've got a black robe is a reasonable expectation. So the customer'll ask for a black robe, because the system's so closed that only the designer will have an accurate representation of what's available. Until we get those designer catalogs that people have been asking for for ages then asking generic questions about what designs are available will be what customers'll have to do.
Interestingly enough, I've also never had a problem with customers being "cheap". If anything, it's the tradesmen who can't properly value the work. Very often I've had people offering to repair my robe for free. Not at cost. Free. Similarly, when I try to charge for enchanting, it's not unheard of for 50-100% size tips.
Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
Again, I think part of that has to do with the large flood of people with the skillset... who have no attachment to it as a way of making money, or as a RP "way of life". If you can find a large pool of tailors who were going to end up buying the skillset regardless and have no expectation of making gold off of or making interesting wares for it, they're bound to not care much about being paid, bringing the market downwards..
Interestingly enough, I've also never had a problem with customers being "cheap". If anything, it's the tradesmen who can't properly value the work. Very often I've had people offering to repair my robe for free. Not at cost. Free. Similarly, when I try to charge for enchanting, it's not unheard of for 50-100% size tips.
Last time I tried to hop on my tattooist and offer my services (to someone who had been looking for 5 days straight), I got the following reply about how much they were paying for tattoos:
"1000 gold per 100 weight, your tints and powerstones."
At which point I simply shrugged, said good luck and logged off. That is probably the most blatant situation I've run into in regards to customers being cheap. The case often is that when I make something for someone, I simply charge cost of materials, never mind time spent on the task/selecting a design. If they choose to tip me, I certainly won't mind, but there's always the case of people being cheap. I'd like to hope that it's more a situation where they don't understand what all is involved in the process, but it seems more often than not they are just trying to save on gold, which is something quite incomprehensible to me. I recently... i.e. 3-4 weeks ago dumped a million gold on someone to buy cheap credits, and I've already made 1.5m since... despite the fact that I rarely bash, let alone bash places that are actually gold-heavy and I really have no other source of income.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Obviously, for your button, only the finest slivers of steel from each ingot are used. <ricardomontalban> Only the best corinthian steel is used in dees button </ricardomontalban>
Interestingly enough, I've also never had a problem with customers being "cheap". If anything, it's the tradesmen who can't properly value the work. Very often I've had people offering to repair my robe for free. Not at cost. Free. Similarly, when I try to charge for enchanting, it's not unheard of for 50-100% size tips.
Last time I tried to hop on my tattooist and offer my services (to someone who had been looking for 5 days straight), I got the following reply about how much they were paying for tattoos:
"1000 gold per 100 weight, your tints and powerstones."
At which point I simply shrugged, said good luck and logged off. That is probably the most blatant situation I've run into in regards to customers being cheap. The case often is that when I make something for someone, I simply charge cost of materials, never mind time spent on the task/selecting a design. If they choose to tip me, I certainly won't mind, but there's always the case of people being cheap. I'd like to hope that it's more a situation where they don't understand what all is involved in the process, but it seems more often than not they are just trying to save on gold, which is something quite incomprehensible to me. I recently... i.e. 3-4 weeks ago dumped a million gold on someone to buy cheap credits, and I've already made 1.5m since... despite the fact that I rarely bash, let alone bash places that are actually gold-heavy and I really have no other source of income.
However, that there is one datapoint that you've been touting for months. It's in no way indicative of general norms. It's not even current. And even if you did accept it as a valid argument, you could just as well flip the argument around. I.E. that you as the service provider haven't made it adequately clear how valuable you consider your work, goods and effort. The first step in getting paid is letting the customer know you expect being paid. If that's too expensive for them, tough luck.
Honestly, if getting a proper craftsman to do your work really is that hard, you as a crafter seeking to make cash should consider yourself lucky, as you've practically got a monopoly going there. Price gouging ahoy.
Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
Honestly, if getting a proper craftsman to do your work really is that hard, you as a crafter seeking to make cash should consider yourself lucky, as you've practically got a monopoly going there. Price gouging ahoy.
Your rebuttal ignores the base presumption that the argument builds on. If you can "wait for a buddy", then it's not that hard to get a proper craftsman.
Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.
I never said it would be easy to find, but there comes a point at which you either face hilarious price gouging... or you just message your buddy you know isn't around much/doesn't have the trade much and go do other things while waiting for them to show up. The majority of such "I need to see the actual tradesperson" transactions don't have much urgency anyways.
Better than me, I provide my own tints and powerstones and charge 10k per 100 weight.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
Comments
Brewmeister Dwarves need a nerf, not their availability increased.
It wouldn't be a problem having archetype-restricted trades if tradeskills were more friendly to use across the board. Brewmeister is one of the less painful trades out there, and according to everyone's opinion, it gives a lot of benefits that would make it very lucrative to pick up for anyone who can do so... and there are still occasional gripes about the difficulty in getting a hold of one.
The Lusternian trade scape, with the unwieldy-ness of its patterns, design access and everything else, has always been something of a pet-peeve for me. Not to mention the cartel system, which seems intent on gouging out extra costs (of buying clans and of clan-slots) from players. I'd say the only thing that rivals or is worse than the current Lusternian trade mess system is old-school Achaea/Aetolia trade system, back when they used what was called the "paper design" system, where people had to lug around huge inventory lists of design items in order to craft. Now that they have overhauled those systems (have they? I think they have, can't remember) though, Lusternia has claimed that top spot for most infuriating trade system amongst the IREs.
I'm not saying we need to go the full way around and do what Imperian did with their ability to let people list designs in shops and only create items as and when they are bought, but hey, something to alleviate these occasional, but clearly problematic complaints about the lack of trade-people for certain trades should certainly be considered, especially if we want to continue to maintain an archetype-restricted trade system. If not increasing the availability of the trades itself, then decreasing the hair-raising costs or the pure, stroke-inducing, infuriating hassle of the trades would go a long way.
Beyond that, I also agree that the cartel and design reviewing system is clunky and costly, both in player resources and admin resources, the other games seem to get along just fine with less central control over designs. Any player with a particular skill can pay a moderate gold fee to join the review board for designs of that trade, drastically increasing the pool of available reviewers, and empowering crafters to make unique - and used designs.
I think it would be much harder to find someone with a trade.
I still think the reasons people have problems are mainly being picky, cheap, and not being specific about what they want (which you could also add, failing to plan ahead).
Estarra the Eternal says, "Give Shevat the floor please."
"1000 gold per 100 weight, your tints and powerstones."
At which point I simply shrugged, said good luck and logged off. That is probably the most blatant situation I've run into in regards to customers being cheap. The case often is that when I make something for someone, I simply charge cost of materials, never mind time spent on the task/selecting a design. If they choose to tip me, I certainly won't mind, but there's always the case of people being cheap. I'd like to hope that it's more a situation where they don't understand what all is involved in the process, but it seems more often than not they are just trying to save on gold, which is something quite incomprehensible to me. I recently... i.e. 3-4 weeks ago dumped a million gold on someone to buy cheap credits, and I've already made 1.5m since... despite the fact that I rarely bash, let alone bash places that are actually gold-heavy and I really have no other source of income.
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it.
Estarra the Eternal says, "Give Shevat the floor please."
Signature!