A few known issues

[Niami DenMother]

I've gotten some responses back on a few things since Omens came out (thanks, Absor!) and decided to make a list here, so folks know some of what's being addressed. As always, there's tons of stuff being worked on by the devs, but this covers ones that I personally had queries out on. As long as Bristlebane doesn't cause more mischief, these should be addressed with the next patch:

• Feran boots currently need gloves pattern, gloves need boots pattern - being fixed
• Ditto that for the murkglider boots and gloves
• Amber resin needed for augments should have an alchemy recipe to go with the make poison version, with the next patch
• The pottery charms should have IKS added to them with the next patch (turning them into an ALL for race)
• Ice cream floats and shakes will be getting a small boost (adding sv cold) and will become drinkable instead of edible
• Food duration on ice cream should be boosted a little
• Charged magnetic vambraces should have a better AC on them after the next patch (they were listing lower AC than the noncharged version)
• A few things that were "magentized" (sic) should be "magnetized"
• The new augments should be getting a size/weight
• More tradeskill flags being added to things

Still outstanding: No new tradeskill interface for the ice cream churn yet, no real ETA.

[Lushissx]

Poison Trivials

I would like to add the diff between alchemy and poison trivials on the new augments. I think rogue trivials need to be lowered a bit. Currently, a 250 PM3 with trophy can have no greater skill than 252. This is 75 points below trivial for a Radiant Bloodflow of Pure Haste for example. Where as an AM3 can get a tradeskill modifier to take their cap to 230 which is only 41 points below trivial of the same type of item.
I have already had people tell me they rather have a alchemist do the combine because even with a 5% modifier, they have better mods.(210 v 252)
The best solution would be to get rid of the 252 cap in tradeskills(pipe dream, I know) or alternatively lower the rogue combine trivials so we have the same probabilities as that lucky alchemist with the 15% mod from VT.

[Fudapuda]

This conclusion makes no sense to me: we know that anyone with a tradeskill of 250, using any modifier, still can't go over 252, since this is a "hard-cap" on the skill level. I've been operating under the assumption that an alchemist, with a hard cap of 200 on alchemy, gets no benefit from any mod item--whether 5% or 15%--since there is nowhere for them to go over 200 anyway. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Fudapuda
Bertox

[Ratblaster]

Alchemy = 210 with 5% geerlok

The Alchemy 200 cap is for un-modified skill. Geerloks can take you over 200. With 5% geerlok, alchemy shows 210 in tradeskill window. There is a 15% alchemy mod item in VexThal but I have never seen it drop, so most alchemy combines will be done with Alchemy 210 + AM3 (my one try at AM2 level failed).

As a side note, the high trivials are dissapointing due to the rarety of acid component for combines. I only ever got 1 slugworm and have NEVER seen one for sale in bazaar. I only ever gotten 2 trean flies, and the only few ever in bazaar were priced at 30k. They seem rarer than the augs them selves. There is no opportunity to repeat tough combines until success due to lack of slugworms.

Is anyone finding them more attainable? I think drop rate should be increased.

[Lushissx]

hard cap

This conclusion makes no sense to me: we know that anyone with a tradeskill of 250, using any modifier, still can't go over 252, since this is a "hard-cap" on the skill level. I've been operating under the assumption that an alchemist, with a hard cap of 200 on alchemy, gets no benefit from any mod item--whether 5% or 15%--since there is nowhere for them to go over 200 anyway. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Fudapuda
Bertox

My guildie says his skill level with his modifier from VT is 230. I could get a screen shot I guess if that is what you mean by evidence. Or I guess you could get a shaman up to 200 and buy a geerlock. /shrug

[Twistagain]

I have yet to see any of the components (the base augments included) drop. Maybe I'm fighting in the wrong areas?

I've fought quite a bit in Bloodfields, Harbinger's Spire, and Wall of Slaughter (with a little fighting in Dranik's Scar, Ruined City of Dranik, and an instanced zone that I can't remember its name.)

So, I think the drop rates are ridiculously low...but apparently, some people are getting the augments at least.

[Fudapuda]

No, I have the VT 15% alchemy mod item. That's not my point. My point is, what the window shows is irrelevent. I don't think your success rate is modified over 200 regardless. I'd like to see anyone who has done parses that show a higher success rate at 200 + mod item than at 200 without, or with a 15% mod as opposed to a 5% mod. (and this doesn't even raise the issue of how the Mastery AAs are implemented--I'm guessing those are handled somehow through a second check).

If the skill is hard-capped, its hard-capped, just as most skills are hard-capped at 252 regardless of the strength of their mod item.

I doubt such parses are out there, given that pretty much all alchemy combines far enough over 200 to generate useful data are expensive to make, and doing a large enough sample of them just to get decent data would be a huge expense, but my admittedly small sample leads me to believe that, once I'm at 200, no mod item is having any effect at all--my results appear to be the same whether I remember to equip my Shrinky Orb or not.

Fudapuda

[Ngreth Thergn]

And maybe those very few people with that very rare item deserve a better chance. This item is so rare it is almost an artifact (not quite)

with geerlok/trophy, the rogues STILL get a better chance to make the non-adjective augment than shaman do (and probably the pure, though we do not have data). The very very few shaman with this item will get a better chance that rogues.

That assumes the previous post is not true about a hard 200 cap.

[Fudapuda]

You are certainly right there, Ngreth--I was very fortunate in that the 15% mod items hit the game at just the right time for me: I was the only person in our guild who was seriously insane over tradeskills, and we were just getting in to VT at that time. My guild (thanks, Dragon Council) wanted somebody who could make items for guildmates, so they were kind enough to take the odd path through VT that leads to the Temarial, for the Umbracite Swarm Orb (15% alchemy), and also to give me a pair of the Dark Embers Gauntlets (15% smithing), AND to take out Shei for me in Akheva for a set of the Shears (15% tailoring).

At that time, all 3 were greatly prized by me, and I will never part with any of them, but these days, I'm at 1750 anyway (1950 with alchemy) so their value as tools is effectively gone. Their value as sentimental items, of course, remains untarnished...

Fudapuda
Bertox

[Khabok]

What is sad is the fact there used to be a 10% alchemy mod from Griegs End. But when they revamped Griegs they seem to have taken the mob that dropped it out, even though they left almost every other old drop in.

And since I dont have 250 in any tradeskills, what level does the interface show skill at when you equip a 5% mod at 250 skill, does it show 262 or 252 ?

[ColdHeart]

The UI shows 252 with mod for normal tradeskills.
If the UI shows 230 for alchemy, then that is the skill I'd assume it is. The capped skill maybe 200, but I can't see why it would be hard capped there but the UI show different.

[Ngreth Thergn]

Maybe the UI is set with a "hard: code of 252 max (I.E. the ui only, not the internal code just has a "if X > 252 then x=252") instead of some more complex code that tests the skill for a lower cap (though even that code could theoretically be simple, it just may not have been thought of at the time the UI was made)

This is just me playing devils advocate. I have no idea what the actuall cap is for alchemy.

[Silound]

Maybe the UI is set with a "hard: code of 252 max (I.E. the ui only, not the internal code just has a "if X > 252 then x=252") instead of some more complex code that tests the skill for a lower cap (though even that code could theoretically be simple, it just may not have been thought of at the time the UI was made)

This is just me playing devils advocate. I have no idea what the actuall cap is for alchemy.

I'd jump for that, and play the DA myself.

As best I and several programmer friends can deduce (no violations of EULA), any skill or stat is now represented by a signed 15-bit variable (32768 max representation plus sign bit = 16 bit total, standard programming INT value). There are however caps placed by a constant value limiting certain stats and skills for further expansion of the game via simple subtraction and comparison.

Like I said this is our theory as to how it works. Obviously, it's a weak shot in the dark at a target the size of a roach, but this is as best we can figure it works. Using that and some software, they were able to program a database that could keep track of characters and everything about them calling various functions. However, judging by the amount code they used, either we missed a way to make it more efficient, or we're way off. Either way, it's a guess.

[Kieroth_whiteleaf]

You're mostly consistent with my theory on how the database is set up.. I work on other games that store similar character data.. as a general rule of thumb you use the smallest dbtype that will support what you want it to do.. I'd *assume* that EQ uses the standard int size (8 bits) to generate values 0-255 and then goes to hard caps like Ngreth says. For the record, most of the games I work with use the 255 cap for everything despite the fact that common values are <20 and VERY few things have exceeded 50 (HP is about the only thing I can think of offhand), so we could easily use 6 bits (less in some cases) for most everything except HP (and 7 bits would cover that). MUCH more effiecient when working with large databases, but 8 bit systems are generally more familiar to programmers so tend to get used WAY more often.

However, it also appears that they're more open to considering widening this field because of the recent stat increases, so perhaps skill increases aren't that far off. The only caveat to this is that there are MANY more skills than attributes, so it could be a space issue.. a couple bits doesn't seem like much but when you're talking about millions of data points (400,000 players x skills x small numbers of bits = big number) it adds up quickly. I might be off on player count, that's one I seem to remember hearing at some point.

From a programming standpoint and what I understand of the way things are coded, I would venture to say that recoding the tradeskill caps probably wouldn't be hard. From a database standpoint it's very possible that it could do some pretty harsh damage.

SFG

[Zaephod]

a couple bits doesn't seem like much but when you're talking about millions of data points (400,000 players x skills x small numbers of bits = big number) it adds up quickly. I might be off on player count, that's one I seem to remember hearing at some point.

you missed the multiple characters per account so multiply by 8 again