<*pokes Blaze*>

 

Blaze, I don't post around this area unless I have a good-sized opinion about a matter.  You didn't realize from how I worded my post that I actually liked and agreed with your idea?  Don't block yourself for a length of time, just keep the ideas coming when you hit a snag. :(

 

~D. V. "depressively confused" Devnull

To be honest, it seemed more to me like you were just saying people shouldn't criticize me.

 

This is a public message board, people are allowed to do that.

 

If that wasn't the case I apologize I misread your post.

 

Thank you for agreeing with this.

 

EDIT: Also, I think taking a long break is good for me. When 3 months are up, I will actually think things through. I'm not doing that right now.

Edited April 23, 201511 yr by Blaze The Movie Fan

I hate how everyone acts like the economy is the greatest aspect of the game. If prices will fluctuate with the value of gold, does it really matter in the long term? +1 supporter for Blaze

I hate how everyone acts like the economy is the greatest aspect of the game. If prices will fluctuate with the value of gold, does it really matter in the long term? +1 supporter for Blaze

Unfortunately it does, higher alchemy prices could mean the GE prices would increase as well.

 

It's already hard enough to buy a lot of sharks, I wouldn't want it to be even harder.

Okay, here's my two cents:

 

As of today we have low alch (40% store value) and high alch (60% store value).

Assume we introduce super high alch. We'll not be silly and assume 80%, but for the sake of it, let's go with 70%.

 

Now, let's look into alching rune platelegs. High alch is 38400gp. Super high alch would be 44800gp, a 6400gp difference.

This would - obviously - just push up the prices for supplies for rune smithing as it becomes the standard, and as long as there's no big loss on high xp methods that'll at least push the supply prices to breakeven with alch value minus alcher's profit margin.

 

Yay for players? This would help the ones doing gathering skills and slayer for drops alot income-wise, it'd barely make a difference for alchers. For the rest of the players, the inflation would hurt their ability to buy resources.

 

How would we counter the increased GP influx causing much inflation?

- make it require multiple nature runes (more fires would just be countered from staves) (shift 'profits' to another skill.

- make the casts on it limited to a certain amount a day, to be unlocked through a D&D. (limit effect)

- make the casts only possibly with a (pricy) degradeable staff. (add a matching money sink)

 

Now how could we avoid making high alch obsolete? That's fairly simple actually: (note: casts/h are very wild guesses, just trying to make a point)

- low alch is faster (assume 1500 alches/h)

- high alch is slower (assume 1200 alches/hour)

- super high alch could be even slower (say 600 alches/hour)

 

This would leave a fair few items that would be better to high alch then to super high alch. (esp. the lower value items, perhaps more fitting with the level range high alch is in). Heck, up untill recently (action bars and what not) low alch had its uses. At barb fishing Ive low alched 30k+ fish to keep inventory clear without disrupting fishing or manually dropping all.

 

Key would be finding balance, both in limiting outrageous GP influx, as finding a balance in cost/profit vs magic exp gained along the way.

Okay, here's my two cents:

 

As of today we have low alch (40% store value) and high alch (60% store value).

Assume we introduce super high alch. We'll not be silly and assume 80%, but for the sake of it, let's go with 70%.

 

Now, let's look into alching rune platelegs. High alch is 38400gp. Super high alch would be 44800gp, a 6400gp difference.

This would - obviously - just push up the prices for supplies for rune smithing as it becomes the standard, and as long as there's no big loss on high xp methods that'll at least push the supply prices to breakeven with alch value minus alcher's profit margin.

 

Yay for players? This would help the ones doing gathering skills and slayer for drops alot income-wise, it'd barely make a difference for alchers. For the rest of the players, the inflation would hurt their ability to buy resources.

 

How would we counter the increased GP influx causing much inflation?

- make it require multiple nature runes (more fires would just be countered from staves) (shift 'profits' to another skill.

- make the casts on it limited to a certain amount a day, to be unlocked through a D&D. (limit effect)

- make the casts only possibly with a (pricy) degradeable staff. (add a matching money sink)

 

Now how could we avoid making high alch obsolete? That's fairly simple actually: (note: casts/h are very wild guesses, just trying to make a point)

- low alch is faster (assume 1500 alches/h)

- high alch is slower (assume 1200 alches/hour)

- super high alch could be even slower (say 600 alches/hour)

 

This would leave a fair few items that would be better to high alch then to super high alch. (esp. the lower value items, perhaps more fitting with the level range high alch is in). Heck, up untill recently (action bars and what not) low alch had its uses. At barb fishing Ive low alched 30k+ fish to keep inventory clear without disrupting fishing or manually dropping all.

 

Key would be finding balance, both in limiting outrageous GP influx, as finding a balance in cost/profit vs magic exp gained along the way.

 

What's the point of this post? I already acknowledged that this suggestion is bad so you're bringing nothing new to the table.

This isnt really a suggestion, its more of a need.

This isnt really a suggestion, its more of a need.

 

Alright, fair point. But my point still stands, there is no reason to beat it anymore that this thread is terrible.

 

What's the point in hammering it in if the person who made the thread in the first place even admits it was bad?

^ I disagree, it fits into my suggestion that says rune items should be more expensive.

 

Okay, here's my two cents:

 

As of today we have low alch (40% store value) and high alch (60% store value).

Assume we introduce super high alch. We'll not be silly and assume 80%, but for the sake of it, let's go with 70%.

 

Now, let's look into alching rune platelegs. High alch is 38400gp. Super high alch would be 44800gp, a 6400gp difference.

This would - obviously - just push up the prices for supplies for rune smithing as it becomes the standard, and as long as there's no big loss on high xp methods that'll at least push the supply prices to breakeven with alch value minus alcher's profit margin.

 

Yay for players? This would help the ones doing gathering skills and slayer for drops alot income-wise, it'd barely make a difference for alchers. For the rest of the players, the inflation would hurt their ability to buy resources.

 

How would we counter the increased GP influx causing much inflation?

- make it require multiple nature runes (more fires would just be countered from staves) (shift 'profits' to another skill.

- make the casts on it limited to a certain amount a day, to be unlocked through a D&D. (limit effect)

- make the casts only possibly with a (pricy) degradeable staff. (add a matching money sink)

 

Now how could we avoid making high alch obsolete? That's fairly simple actually: (note: casts/h are very wild guesses, just trying to make a point)

- low alch is faster (assume 1500 alches/h)

- high alch is slower (assume 1200 alches/hour)

- super high alch could be even slower (say 600 alches/hour)

 

This would leave a fair few items that would be better to high alch then to super high alch. (esp. the lower value items, perhaps more fitting with the level range high alch is in). Heck, up untill recently (action bars and what not) low alch had its uses. At barb fishing Ive low alched 30k+ fish to keep inventory clear without disrupting fishing or manually dropping all.

 

Key would be finding balance, both in limiting outrageous GP influx, as finding a balance in cost/profit vs magic exp gained along the way.

 

What's the point of this post? I already acknowledged that this suggestion is bad so you're bringing nothing new to the table.

 

 

The post did what you didn't:  think about what would be required to make such a suggestion viable.

I didn't state the idea was bad, I just bothered to think about how the obvious downsides (inflation) could be counteracted, to make the 'super high alchemy' think work without turning high alchemy and low alchemy entirely obsolete.

 

Your base idea, without the additional thought and countermeasures was indeed crap. I just stated that it doesn't necessarily have to be bad, if it's properly integrated. If that's not bringing something new to the table in your eyes, I don't know what is.

Okay, here's my two cents:

 

As of today we have low alch (40% store value) and high alch (60% store value).

Assume we introduce super high alch. We'll not be silly and assume 80%, but for the sake of it, let's go with 70%.

 

Now, let's look into alching rune platelegs. High alch is 38400gp. Super high alch would be 44800gp, a 6400gp difference.

This would - obviously - just push up the prices for supplies for rune smithing as it becomes the standard, and as long as there's no big loss on high xp methods that'll at least push the supply prices to breakeven with alch value minus alcher's profit margin.

 

Yay for players? This would help the ones doing gathering skills and slayer for drops alot income-wise, it'd barely make a difference for alchers. For the rest of the players, the inflation would hurt their ability to buy resources.

 

How would we counter the increased GP influx causing much inflation?

- make it require multiple nature runes (more fires would just be countered from staves) (shift 'profits' to another skill.

- make the casts on it limited to a certain amount a day, to be unlocked through a D&D. (limit effect)

- make the casts only possibly with a (pricy) degradeable staff. (add a matching money sink)

 

Now how could we avoid making high alch obsolete? That's fairly simple actually: (note: casts/h are very wild guesses, just trying to make a point)

- low alch is faster (assume 1500 alches/h)

- high alch is slower (assume 1200 alches/hour)

- super high alch could be even slower (say 600 alches/hour)

 

This would leave a fair few items that would be better to high alch then to super high alch. (esp. the lower value items, perhaps more fitting with the level range high alch is in). Heck, up untill recently (action bars and what not) low alch had its uses. At barb fishing Ive low alched 30k+ fish to keep inventory clear without disrupting fishing or manually dropping all.

 

Key would be finding balance, both in limiting outrageous GP influx, as finding a balance in cost/profit vs magic exp gained along the way.

 

Now that I'm back to the community I will respond like promised.

 

You know this could work.