Im pretty sure I've been anything but silent with you. To the point where you wanted me to stop talking to you.
So I did.
You kept going after claiming you blocked me. It's not a one way street, lady.
Im pretty sure I've been anything but silent with you. To the point where you wanted me to stop talking to you.
So I did.
You kept going after claiming you blocked me. It's not a one way street, lady.
Last edited by keyburz; 05-08-2016 at 06:06 PM.
I'm going to defend myself thank you. This isnt going to be some childish game of you getting to say whatever you want and I have no right to defend myself.
Or maybe youre saying that because i'm disagreeing with what you're saying. Disagreeing with you does not equal derail.
Plenty of people have disagreed with me. Plenty of people have stayed on topic. For some reason you can't seem to do that.I'm going to defend myself thank you. This isnt going to be some childish game of you getting to say whatever you want and I have no right to defend myself.
Or maybe youre saying that because i'm disagreeing with what you're saying. Disagreeing with you does not equal derail.
Plenty of people aren't as sensitive as you, who for some reason just can't comprehend what the discussion is about, yet feel the need to have the last word.


 
			
			
				And another thread bites the dust :P
Any ways...
I really think the next set of potions, whenever they're introduced, needs to follow the old x-potions of <main stat> pattern. Increasing yield is a must, there's no question about that. I wouldn't even mind if the mats cost a lot. But they need to be viable by not being a completely time sink to craft a stack of them.


 
			
			
				Crafting any level 60 starred items takes a while, unless you are happy with NQ.
Difficulty is in no way the defining factor to why max pots aren't as plentiful as x-pots. The reason behind their unpopularity is because of a domino effect of issues:
1. Regardless of whether anyone is still pushing server first, this is still a period where a good number of players are taking a break and waiting for 3.3. Sheer loss of player count limits your potential market, not to mention the number of Gatherers able to stock the market with mats and lower the cost of the final product.
2. Any group serious enough to still be pushing for a server first likely has a private Crafter/seller making them pots so you're not going to see them on the market, but they'll be buying up the mats (likely in large quantities).
3. Because of the reduced demand sales are much slower. A profit is a profit, but most players want a quick, reliable sale, regardless of the margins.
4. Slower sales means mats are less plentiful for the same reason as #3, Gatherers prefer a quick, reliable sale.
5. Because of the above reasons ALC Specialist has very few options for gil generation compared to other classes and is subsequently chosen much less often.
When you combine all of the above reasons you get a market where the mats to make the potions are high cost or nonexistent due to low demand/low active population, which forces a Crafter to charge more for the final product, which in turn lowers the frequency of sales due to the high price, which decreases interest in ALC Specialist due to poor gil generation potential, which decreases the competition in said market allowing someone to easily monopolize it and charge even higher prices (if they so choose) which can also lower demand even further and you're left with a small number of high cost high use potions that very few people are willing to pay for.
Rather than the difficulty being the problem, I'd say it's the output, and this is something they've already said they're going to address. More pots per Craft means Crafters can charge 1/3 the price per pot and still retain the same profit margins even if mats stayed the same price, which they won't (not for long anyways) because a lower price equates to more sales, making it more profitable for a Gatherer to Gather and sell the mats. This lowers the mat cost due to increased competition in the mat market and will in turn lower the final product cost even further, which makes them even more appealing not only to buyers but also to other Crafters who may pick up ALC Specialist to join the max pot market, which in turn lowers the price AGAIN due to the new competition.
1. X-pots still sell frequently. If there were truly a raid lull this wouldn't happen, because they wouldn't be needed.
2. Yes, which means less marketboard activity, because nobody with a social life is going to craft these without an agreement beforehand due to the time sink involved in crafting, mainly due to the yield AND difficulty in the recipes. If you're having to use Maker's Mark on every craft, your free time for other activities (i.e. raiding) will go down significantly, especially if you're counted on to provide the potions for your raid.
3/4. There's no reduced demand for pots. People still buy x-pots all the time
5. ALC should be renamed "Orchestrion Sheet Printer" at this point :\
If they're going to limit these recipes to ALC specialists, they need to increase the yield to make them viable, yes, but they should've followed the pattern X-pots had, where they remained merely 2-star recipes in the face of 3-star crafts being introduced at the same time.
They sell more frequently because of their price, which again has little to do with how easy they are to Craft and more to do with the yield and mat cost. If the yield for max pots was increased and their production cost decreased they'd be flying off the shelves regardless of difficulty. There will always be raiders of course, but at their current price I don't expect anyone but a hardcore raider to bother with max pots, and my point here (which I should have specified) was that there is a lull in hardcore raiding, which translates into a loss in potential buyers, making max pots even less appealing.
I agree with everything here, however you do not need Maker's Mark to reliably HQ a 3-Star, and if you're geared enough to drop it it becomes trivial enough to macro, removing the "difficulty" as well as a significant portion of the time it takes to Craft each item. The values for the simulator are still incorrect for Ingenuity II, but below is a macro that can be completed with a minimum of 873 Craftsmanship and 446 CP:2. Yes, which means less marketboard activity, because nobody with a social life is going to craft these without an agreement beforehand due to the time sink involved in crafting, mainly due to the yield AND difficulty in the recipes. If you're having to use Maker's Mark on every craft, your free time for other activities (i.e. raiding) will go down significantly, especially if you're counted on to provide the potions for your raid.
It has 26 steps (Compared to the 40+ of a Maker's Mark rotation), guaranteed Progress, and if you can reach 464 CP you have a guaranteed Precise/Basic Touch. The downsides are that there are only 10 Hasty Touches and there's little room for Tricks of the Trade, however I prefer this rotation even when I manually Craft as I don't have to fish for a Tricks of the Trade to know I can Precise Touch a Good should it show up, and it's much faster/more mindless than Maker's Mark.
Again, this was a reference to the reduced demand for max pots due to the lull in the hardcore raiding scene as they're the only ones willing to pay the current market prices.
Pretty much, yeah, but I can see a large number of players switching over once yields increase.
To be honest I wasn't around when x-pots were released, but I doubt every single Crafter could macro them out the gate. Max pots will be the new x-pots come 3.3 assuming they increase the yields and the new gear is relatively accessible.If they're going to limit these recipes to ALC specialists, they need to increase the yield to make them viable, yes, but they should've followed the pattern X-pots had, where they remained merely 2-star recipes in the face of 3-star crafts being introduced at the same time.
Crafting is my Endgame, and I'm an Elitist.
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | 
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.

 
			 Reply With Quote
  Reply With Quote 
			 Originally Posted by keyburz
 Originally Posted by keyburz
					
 
			
