Existance of success caps vs existance of tradeskills AAs

[Twistagain]

Right now my understanding is that Salvage is the only real tradeskill AA tied significantly to level. (70 for Salvage 3) and I could understand an argument to remove this restriction, or any on the mastery AA (I do not recall if these have level requirements) if they too are level restricted.

Salvage is the highest requirement, followed by the masteries. The lowest requirement is New Tanaan Crafting Mastery (req level 51). So, people under 51 cannot get more than 1 tradeskill past 200 and cannot have any masteries or salvage.

[Elyssanda]

I was about the 3rd or 4th person to vote no on this. It's a no on the aa part, not the cap part.

I think caps should be revisited, on a case by case basis.. not completely done away with.

I don't believe the AA's (tanaan crafting part) needs to be touched. Without Powerleveling, it is still very very easy to level up to 51. Since TSS came out, I've got a necro Drakkin to level 30 playing about 2 hours a week, maybe 3. I only play her when there is NOTHING for my main to do. She is non-twinked, wearing whatever armor she gets from quests, and cultural beginner's level DON armor. I do have some things saved up for her when she gets a little bigger, but it's nothing I haven't bought off of a merchant in TSS. (vendor mined not normal stock that is) If I were to play her even 12 hours a week, she would already be 51 I'm sure.

I did bankroll her tailoring abit, but I didn't buy anything for it in the baz.

you are welcome to check out her verified Magelo (and please don't say I could fake that, I can't. Just not worth my time to figure out how to cheat something I use mainly for MY purposes only.
http://eq.magelo.com/profile/1335025

[Bryko]

And it comes back to being about balance. Just like it takes a little effort to get a tradeskill over 200, it takes a little effort to level up a character. I leveled up a shaman that I started on labor day weekend, playing on average 4 hrs a week to 57. No powerleveling was involved. I did this solely for the purpose of having an alchemist. I'm about to start farming deepwater inks soon to get it going.

There is no single "right" way to approach the ultimate goal as there are various paths. Ultimately it comes down to each of us to decide what path suits us best in terms of balancing this scale.

I do agree on revisiting the caps in place of hardcoded success caps. However I disagree with taking away areas of character development.

I agree to an extent that in theory, under ideal circumstances, one who tradeskills more than another would be a better tradeskiller (up to a certain point!). But if one person spends 12 hours a day tradeskilling and gets to 300 in a desired skill in 4 days and another person tradeskills 2 hrs a day and gets to 300 in that same skill in 1 month, who is the better tradeskiller? Is the degree of a person who graduates in 3 years better than the same degree of a person who graduates in 5?

We have the choice of focusing on 1 dimension or another. We also have the choice of focusing on more than 1 dimension. Each has its own rewards. As stated before, it is up to each of us to determine which approach is best suited for ourselves as everyone is not homogenous.

[Denidil]

i did NOT mean to include "new tanaan crafting mastery" or whatever it's exact name is in the above

[Elyssanda]

I've also heard, and agree with, the grumbling from lower end people in terms of XP, who reach 300 - but cannot afford the AAs. their grumbling is largely correct.

Deni, I realize you may not have meant specifically the NTM aa's but that is mainly what I read this part of your to mean.

As for salvage, I figure it's ok where it is. it's in levels.. and honestly, the Masteries can be purchased lower if someone is being specific to one tradeskill, and if they are going multi-tradeskill they need to be 51+ anyway if you aren't going to take away the NTM AA's as well.

so this part is still a NO for me.

[Denidil]

i meant it specially to be a reference to the Mastery AAs - not NTCM

[Wyora]

I think in the end it comes down to whether you think people should have to "pay their dues" exping before they can profit from high end tradeskills, or whether there should be an option for doing that at lower levels.

You have the "choice" right now to do all high end tradeskills at a low level without "paying your dues" right now, just not all one one character.

[Zaltak]

Success Caps vs tradeskill AA's

WTF is your proposal?:-P

[Denidil]

to remove the Mastery AAs - ie the ones that improve your chance to succeed, and Salvage (salvage replaced by automatic salvage chance based on your skill) if we can get the trivials of recipes that were set with the AAs taken into account adjusted appropriately, and success caps eliminated

[Boleslav]

Bryko wrote:

I agree to an extent that in theory, under ideal circumstances, one who tradeskills more than another would be a better tradeskiller (up to a certain point!). But if one person spends 12 hours a day tradeskilling and gets to 300 in a desired skill in 4 days and another person tradeskills 2 hrs a day and gets to 300 in that same skill in 1 month, who is the better tradeskiller?

But the person who tradeskills 12 hours a day can't ever be as good as the other unless he/she gets to level 70 (to get Mastery and Salvage AAs). EQ makes it tough to do tradeskills as your main activity without also grinding levels and AAs.

When I was starting EQ, at level 16, I spent far more time smithing than adventuring. I was as good a smith as just about anyone on the server. By the time I was 30th level, just before Luclin came out, I was one of the first 250 smiths on the server.

It's not feasible for someone to be on the edge of tradeskills without doing a fair amount of exp grinding anymore. Tradeskills have lost something because of that.

Boleslav

[Elfdruidess]

If everything in EQ hinges on getting exp, then the choice becomes to exp or not play. That's not much of a choice.

Totally agree.

I voted yes because I am against exp tied into tradeskills in anyway. That is the only way to establish tradeskilling as a truely alternative way to play EQ.

Tradeskilling should be a choice in how you spend your time. Not how you spend your exp.

[Verdandi]

You have the "choice" right now to do all high end tradeskills at a low level without "paying your dues" right now, just not all one one character.

Not with the mastery AAs. It's very hard to compete when your fellow tradespeople have a 50% better chance at success than you do.

[Bryko]

Hey Bole, I remember when you achieved 250 smithing

I guess I view it more of a glass half full than a glass half empty scenario

On the raw numerical aspect, a level 30 has as much opportunity to reach 300 in a tradeskill as does a level 65. Once you hit 300, you can't skill up any more in that tradeskill. I figure the mastery AAs is more of a reward to those who both skilled up and leveled up instead of as a "penalty" against those who are not high enough to pursue the AAs because it was not something that was taken away but rather something added. Otherwise why not view the artisan charm as a penalty to those who specialize in only 1 tradeskill?

It takes a certain amount of resources (plat or otherwise) for a level 15, for example, to achieve high tradeskills. I would have brought up my tradeskills at a lower level if I had the resources. but it wasn't until I was a higher level that I had the balance of resources and farm time to do so.

[Denidil]

the AAs are not a reward when they're allowing people to bypass the advantages that you're supposed to get by skilling up- and as far as I can tell the creation of the caps was a reaction to their existance.

[Bryko]

Ok, I guess I should clarify my position. I feel they are a reward under normal circumstances. I believe the caps should be done away with as I feel it is too much of a violation to the principles of tradeskilling.