2.0 Finished consumable stack size suggestion

**Baxter** · 09-29-2012 07:32 AM

Please consider reducing stack size from x99 to 12 for most finished consumables for 2.0. For both alchemy and culinary, x99 stack size will kill any chance of a market on an even more populated server with the addition of more cooks and alchemists. Reducing the stack size will enable competitive pricing, make crafting overage harder to move, and in short stop mass market creation as inventory will then be even more precious.

12 is a favorable size as it provides 360 minutes of food and for alchemy an hour, on average, of medicinal support factoring in cool down timer. Players would obviously be free to carry more than one stack of an item, but would have to take into consideration the matter of inventory.

I can understand the functionality for x99, but as far as practicality I feel it hurts far more than it helps.

Thanks for reading

**TaalAzura** · 09-29-2012 07:36 AM

>Has 12 stack limit
>asks for 99 limit
>gets 99 limit
>asks for 12 limit
>mfw

**Medura** · 09-29-2012 07:44 AM

one word: NO!

i do not want to see full inventory 24/7 all over again.

**AmyNeudaiz** · 09-29-2012 07:54 AM

Where is the dislike button? Do not want.

**Orophin** · 09-29-2012 07:57 AM

We're losing half our inventory in 2.0 and you want stack sizes reduced by over 8x ? No thanks.

**Baxter** · 09-29-2012 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by Orophin

We're losing half our inventory in 2.0 and you want stack sizes reduced by over 8x ? No thanks.

This is correct, for finish consumable items.

**Raldo** · 09-29-2012 08:06 AM

I fail to see how any of your supposed points in favor of x12 stack size are valid.

**Baxter** · 09-29-2012 06:01 PM

You fail to see how it enables competitive pricing and makes it harder to inundate the market with useless product?

**Medura** · 09-29-2012 07:01 PM

competive pricing? why? people wouldnt buy it because it takes to much space, it would become so cheap that it wouldnt be a point in being a chef or alchemist at all.

**Baxter** · 09-29-2012 09:54 PM

Example. You finish your hard day of mixing or cooking, but today you are cooking for profit and not for a skillup. You check market value for the day and proceed to set your product out on the market.

You check the amount of units sold on average via previous sells, and there you find 24 purchases in a two day span averaging around 15 units each. Two days, 15 units on average within 24 purchases that is 360 units in 48 hours.

Then you find someone who has also mixed/cooked for the day. It seems they have placed 5 stacks of x99 at an undercutted price of the seller before. That is 495 units placed out on the market at an undercut price as before - this is all within one day. Not to mention every other chef and alchemist who will now also place their product up for the day, also at a competitive rate.

According to recent history that one person has set enough product on the market to meet demand for more than two days. If this had been x12, and even in the dramatic world where you insist there is no portable or personal storage and we don't return to town to shout for events every 2 hours, that one person would not be able to place enough supply on the market to dramatically reduce the cost of one product.

In short my argument is x99 is far too much for most consumable items. Ingredients, and materials should go unchanged. A few consumables should be stackable to x99, but I feel to keep both crafts relevant a deduction in stack size must be made. How you fail to see this as a solution for competitive pricing is beyond me, and cannot be helped. You can simply disagree - it is your right.

Thread: 2.0 Finished consumable stack size suggestion

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

2.0 Finished consumable stack size suggestion