Making Recipe Books useful

[Telorea]

One concern I would have with moving all the recipe stuff to the task window is that when a new expansion is released, it is pretty easy to get task locked.

It also isn't much fun if you have a long task that you work on occasionally, and then accidentally remove that task, which results in losing all your progress.

/seconded

The limit on number of tasks is already extremely restrictive at the moment - especially with TSS and all the progression arcs. This limit *seriously* needs to be doubled at least.

[Unapuma]

While this debate continues on, I am for the changes. For a few reason:

# Currently I have to juggle some 20 tradeskill containers to do almost everything that I can make. This is annoying and inconvenient that I have to run to bazaar to exchange token to get container for a combine or 2. I can't use many of the containers as storeage as most of them don't have 10 slots. This change would help a lot and reduce the dependancy on that female whats-her-name.

#2: when I am searching for a recipe, sometime a keyword such as fine plate would return 100 recipes with similiar name. I don't want colored fine plate, I wanted only regular fine plate. The recipe system should help eliminate redunant recipes and some recipes that no one uses anymore. When was the last time anyone actually made a batch of assorted colored armor? Prismatic dye made colored armor obsolete.

#3 easier to make certain recipe only useable if you have the right expansion. ie Bristleband CHallenge was introduced with PoR but anyone can make them. With the recipe system, the recipe could be found in PoR only zone. This could be an incentive for players to buy the current compilation pack and not stick with their account that hasn't been uipdated since old EQ Gold set (original + Kunark + Velious + Luclin + POP) simply because tradeskill isn't limited to expansion.

The major drawback to this changes are: no more experiment mode to try and discover new recipe. By buying the recipe, you get to figure out what is needed and takes the mystery out of tradeskilling.

[Liwsa]

The down fall for what you just said Unapuma is now you have to store all 20 of those containers as tokens thus taking up 20 of your bank slots instead of a few of those kits being used as containers and only taking up a few slots for your tokenizied containers.

[Kemie Dreamshadow]

I carry 3 bags on my tradeskiller at all times, filled mainly with trophies, ts tools, and collapsed containers. I always leave one main inventory slot open, or have a collapsible in that slot to hold loot. I live with the slot limits and it's really not that tough. The "special" containers like my cultural tailoring kit, reinforced JC bag, coldain tanner's kit, are in my bank, filled with items I'm "storing." If I NEED one of them, it's awfully convenient if I already know the recipe to just stick it in my open slot, find the recipe, hit combine, and stick the bag back in the bank.

We find ways around inconveniences. That's ok by me. I agree that most of the inconveniences aren't any worse than those we live with in real life and make for good gaming. Even the bank storage - hehe things get stored in a huge variety of containers in my house that had some other original purpose.

I don't like the thought that deluxe toolboxes may eventually not be containers. We have four accounts in my house, so 32 banks, many of which are filled with items stashed in deluxe toolboxes. They're big enough to hold anything, they're tradeable, and they're easy to get in PoK.

My tinker would be especially hurt though, by a conversion of these to non-storage containers. She often sorts her banked items within containers in ways that allow her to grab the right toolbox, stick it on herself, hit combine, autoinventory the result, and put the box back in the bank.

Learning recipes from a book wouldn't interfere with this process, but converting combinable containers to an item would. I think...

I guess I'm rambling here. I like most of the changes that have gone into tradeskilling since Ngreth started working on them. But don't take all of the pain or inconvenience out of things, please. Don't make it all so routine the fun goes away. Don't make it all so "easy" that everyone playing the game can become a Master Artisan within a week or less. If you take away too much of the grind, you take away the meaning.

I know you can't bake a cake without breaking eggs. That works two ways - you can't improve it without hurting the feelings of some, but... you STILL can't bake a cake without breaking eggs! Leave us some to break, okay?

Kemie

[Unapuma]

The down fall for what you just said Unapuma is now you have to store all 20 of those containers as tokens thus taking up 20 of your bank slots instead of a few of those kits being used as containers and only taking up a few slots for your tokenizied containers.

True but under new system, you wouldn't need to run to bazaar and un-tokenize them to use it and then re-tokenize them for storage. I could carry more than 8 various containers with me for on the spot tradeskilling. With the current system you're limited to max of 8 containers and if you're in (for example) Ssra temple it's a long way back to bazaar to change tokens then back to ssra temple for more farming.

[Ngreth Thergn]

No-one would loose an amount of "containers" something would be done to allow people who are using the existing containers as storage to continue to have the exact same storage. "Deluxe toolkits" may change to "deluxe storage boxes" and a deluxe storage box can be exchanged for a deluxe toolkit that is not container but it the toolkit needed for combines. So you would "loose" one bag you have to replace.

At least that is one thought about how it might be done. Still just an idea.

[uncleshmoozo]

No-one would loose an amount of "containers" something would be done to allow people who are using the existing containers as storage to continue to have the exact same storage. "Deluxe toolkits" may change to "deluxe storage boxes" and a deluxe storage box can be exchanged for a deluxe toolkit that is not container but it the toolkit needed for combines. So you would "loose" one bag you have to replace.

At least that is one thought about how it might be done. Still just an idea.

That seems like a very good way for this change you're contemplating to work. It's perhaps the least intrusive system that could be easily implemented.



I just had a thought. I haven't really given it a lot of thought so I can't say whether it's a good or bad idea just yet, but since this is still in the "brainstorming" or "pre-brainstorming" phase I'll toss it out.



Suppose you had a single UI window for this new version of the new tradeskill interface system, and suppose that window had multiple tabs for each tradeskill. You could open the window from any "portable tradeskill kit" you were carrying and that would enable tabs for tradeskills which traditionally had portable combine containers and for which you had recipes learned and the appropriate portable tradeskill kit in your inventory -- or -- you could open it from a fixed tradeskill device (forge, oven, kiln, etc.) and enable all the relevant tabs for any portable skills you had (with the restrictions listed above) as well as for that fixed one. Each tab would list your "favorite recipes" for that specific tradeskill and would enable you to search for other learned recipes from that tradeskill.

Heck, if you wanted to be especially nice to us you could even set up a space in a new city zone in an upcoming expansion which had all (or most) of the fixed tradeskill containers and where clicking on any of the fixed tradeskill containers in that room would enable all tabs for portable or fixed tradeskills for which you have learned any recipes and for which you had the portable tradeskill kit (if required), or at least most of those tabs, leaving out tabs for cultural forges and such which might not be available in that room. This would make it a lot quicker to make things that had a lot of cross-tradeskill subcombines.

One problem I see with this system is that you would need a tab for a mixing bowl, one for an oven, one for a kiln, one for a potter's wheel, one for normal smithing, one for cultural smithing, one for normal tailoring, one for coldain tailoring, one for planar tailoring, one for cultural tailoring, and so on, and that might wind up giving you a very large number of tabs. The interface might wind up being a bit cumbersome, to say the least.

Perhaps a set of tabs to select a specific tradeskill, and then a set of context-driven "sub-tabs" to select "regular," "planar," "cultural," or to select "wheel" or "kiln," or to select "mixing bowl" or "oven," or whatever is applicable for a given tradeskill ...

Okay, I freely admit that it's a half-baked idea (or maybe even a raw idea ), but I thought I'd toss it out to help keep the creative juices flowing.

[Abazagaroth]

No-one would loose an amount of "containers" something would be done to allow people who are using the existing containers as storage to continue to have the exact same storage. "Deluxe toolkits" may change to "deluxe storage boxes" and a deluxe storage box can be exchanged for a deluxe toolkit that is not container but it the toolkit needed for combines. So you would "loose" one bag you have to replace.

At least that is one thought about how it might be done. Still just an idea.

You misunderstand. People aren't talking about losing a container in their bank when the items change, they are talking about is the fact you lose SPACE in your bank when you no longer can use tradeskill containers for bags.

If you use a deluxe sewing kit and deluxe toolbox as two bank slots, changing them to non-container items means you lose two slots in your bank as you have to now use something else while still keeping this tradeskill item combiner in your bank.

Now, if you are using a 4-8 slot tradeskill container in your bank you could also gain space, but if you're short on space, I doubt anyone is doing that already.

Its a minor point in this whole discussion, but it is there.

[Caprich]

I would really miss expirement mode, not just from the sentimental reasons of how many items I burned trying to guess the fleeting quiver recipie with everyone else back in the day... but because I have a much better success rate on all expensive combines by using expirement mode.

Anytime I use the new tradeskill UI I fail, anytime I do it manually I don't. So if I had to use the UI version for everything, I would stop making anything that had more than 200pp in bits in it on a regular basis. Which is basically anything useful to players still.

[Ngreth Thergn]

You misunderstand. People aren't talking about losing a container in their bank when the items change, they are talking about is the fact you lose SPACE in your bank when you no longer can use tradeskill containers for bags.

If you use a deluxe sewing kit and deluxe toolbox as two bank slots, changing them to non-container items means you lose two slots in your bank as you have to now use something else while still keeping this tradeskill item combiner in your bank.

Now, if you are using a 4-8 slot tradeskill container in your bank you could also gain space, but if you're short on space, I doubt anyone is doing that already.

Its a minor point in this whole discussion, but it is there.

yes.

But at the same time you don't have to go through all the trouble of moving ten items out of it, into another bag or your own inventory then moving bags, doing he combine(s) then moving ten items around again, swapping bags, moving ten items again.... and if it is not a 10 slot container, you are in the end going to gain a space or more per container since I would assume you would replace the less than ten with a ten. And if the container is not filled with a full 10 items to swap around.. then what do you know... you have space for the one lost per 10 slot thing. There are not that many 10 slot tradeskill containers most people should have 5 at most... cultural sewing, spell research kit, deluxe sewing kit, deluxe toolbox, planar sewing kit(can't remember if it is 8 or 10 and not looking ) and that is a gnome caster, though I guess most casters could fit int he, with a deluxe recharge kit instead.

And then people who carry "collapsible" stuff around, can gain space because they no longer need the open bag slot.

[Bobaten]

I have 4:
Deluxe toolbox
Clockwork Sewing Kit (AFAIK no reason to have a deluxe AND a cultural)
Spell Research Kit
Phantasmal Tome (LoY research book)
That would cost me 4 slots...
but I also have:
Reinforced Jeweler's Kit
Scrindite's Mechanoinstruction Holepoker (When I got the PoR bank slots I stopped tokenizing it)
So I gain 9 slots there.

[Aldier]

Also cultural fletching kits for those that have them.

[uncleshmoozo]

yes.

But at the same time you don't have to go through all the trouble of moving ten items out of it, into another bag or your own inventory then moving bags, doing he combine(s) then moving ten items around again, swapping bags, moving ten items again.... and if it is not a 10 slot container, you are in the end going to gain a space or more per container since I would assume you would replace the less than ten with a ten. And if the container is not filled with a full 10 items to swap around.. then what do you know... you have space for the one lost per 10 slot thing. There are not that many 10 slot tradeskill containers most people should have 5 at most... cultural sewing, spell research kit, deluxe sewing kit, deluxe toolbox, planar sewing kit(can't remember if it is 8 or 10 and not looking ) and that is a gnome caster, though I guess most casters could fit int he, with a deluxe recharge kit instead.

And then people who carry "collapsible" stuff around, can gain space because they no longer need the open bag slot.

Okay ... I'd like to see if I can help to clear up some confusion.

Let's take a concrete example. I have a level 16 Gnome magician named Shtink. He's a clever little fellow with nimble fingers and he's recently capped off his tinkering skill at 300. (Hooray! )

Because I created him after Deluxe Toolboxes were added to several vendors in POK his bank is filled with Deluxe Toolboxes being used as storage containers and he carries a few of them around as well. He also carries a few Leatherfoot Haversacks and a Rallic Pack.

Within the context of the admittedly very preliminary, not yet solidified, possibly-to-be-proposed idea that you are contemplating for some possible long term implementation ... maybe ... ... am I correct in thinking that --

1. all of his current tradeskill containers would be converted from combine containers to simply storage containers, possibly with some new names?
2. all of those containers would retain all of their current characteristics as storage and carrying containers -- number of slots, size of those slots, overall weight of the container, etc.?
3. in order to actually do tinkering he would need to acquire a new item (called "Gnomish Tinkering Tools," perhaps) which would be used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window?
4. this new item which is used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window would be something which was not a container and that it would be able to fit inside other containers?
5. this new item which is used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window would be just as available in the game as the Toolboxes are now?
6. this new item which is used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window would do so by being right clicked in either a general inventory slot, and/or (perhaps) some combination of the primary, secondary, range and/or ammo slots?
7. that once clicked this item could be moved back inside one of his bags without actually closing his tradeskill interface window?
8. other tradeskills with portable combine containers would be similarly affected?
9. there would continue to be available in game something akin to the 10-slot Deluxe Toolbox that people could buy at merchants in places like POK and use for bank storage and carrying items?

A simple numbered list of responses consisting of "yes," "no," "maybe," or "I haven't worked that out yet" would be as much as I would ask for as answers to these questions, assuming, that is, you're ready, willing and able to provide those answers at this time, with the obvious caveat that this entire idea is so preliminary that any answers you'd provide at this time would be subject to future revision.



In the event that some of the questions would have answers which you feel would require some kind of elaboration then I'd welcome that.

Example: question 2. all of those containers would retain all of their current characteristics as storage and carrying containers -- number of slots, size of those slots, overall weight of the container, etc.? Your possible answer: "Yes, except the resulting new containers might in some cases wind up weighing more than they currently do."

I hope that by asking these questions I'm not messing anything up and that they give you the chance to clear up some of the confusion which some people may be experiencing.



Thanks again for all you do, Ngreth.

[Strokker]

Now I seem to understand all this a bit better , BUT still s always remain totaly confused by Tradeskills. I am in no way good at riddles or anything of the like and have more than often relied upon the good people here at EQTC to guide me in my Trades. If we have to buy books to learn this could be ok, but If I have to buy books to RE-learn all I already know like with the past tradeskill change where I forgot all my alchemy recipies< shiver >. I feel that I would not like it at all. As for the possible loss of experimentation, well I can understand some frustration there. All in all I think this could be good and maybe you could even take the new clicky thing and when you get your trophy you could hand it to the person who gives out the tradeskill trophy quest when completed and get back a nice combined thingie...lol.

[Ngreth Thergn]

Okay ... I'd like to see if I can help to clear up some confusion.

Let's take a concrete example. I have a level 16 Gnome magician named Shtink. He's a clever little fellow with nimble fingers and he's recently capped off his tinkering skill at 300. (Hooray! )

Because I created him after Deluxe Toolboxes were added to several vendors in POK his bank is filled with Deluxe Toolboxes being used as storage containers and he carries a few of them around as well. He also carries a few Leatherfoot Haversacks and a Rallic Pack.

Within the context of the admittedly very preliminary, not yet solidified, possibly-to-be-proposed idea that you are contemplating for some possible long term implementation ... maybe ... ... am I correct in thinking that --

1. all of his current tradeskill containers would be converted from combine containers to simply storage containers, possibly with some new names?
2. all of those containers would retain all of their current characteristics as storage and carrying containers -- number of slots, size of those slots, overall weight of the container, etc.?
3. in order to actually do tinkering he would need to acquire a new item (called "Gnomish Tinkering Tools," perhaps) which would be used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window?
4. this new item which is used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window would be something which was not a container and that it would be able to fit inside other containers?
5. this new item which is used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window would be just as available in the game as the Toolboxes are now?
6. this new item which is used to access the tinkering tradeskill interface window would do so by being right clicked in either a general inventory slot, and/or (perhaps) some combination of the primary, secondary, range and/or ammo slots?
7. that once clicked this item could be moved back inside one of his bags without actually closing his tradeskill interface window?
8. other tradeskills with portable combine containers would be similarly affected?
9. there would continue to be available in game something akin to the 10-slot Deluxe Toolbox that people could buy at merchants in places like POK and use for bank storage and carrying items?

A simple numbered list of responses consisting of "yes," "no," "maybe," or "I haven't worked that out yet" would be as much as I would ask for as answers to these questions, assuming, that is, you're ready, willing and able to provide those answers at this time, with the obvious caveat that this entire idea is so preliminary that any answers you'd provide at this time would be subject to future revision.



In the event that some of the questions would have answers which you feel would require some kind of elaboration then I'd welcome that.

Example: question 2. all of those containers would retain all of their current characteristics as storage and carrying containers -- number of slots, size of those slots, overall weight of the container, etc.? Your possible answer: "Yes, except the resulting new containers might in some cases wind up weighing more than they currently do."

I hope that by asking these questions I'm not messing anything up and that they give you the chance to clear up some of the confusion which some people may be experiencing.



Thanks again for all you do, Ngreth.

1. yes
2. yes
3. yes, and you could exchange a re-named container for the new combine item for free.
4. yes
5. probably. Possibly some exceptions... and with the knowledge that some are not really necessary anymore. It will not be necessary to have a toolkit and a deluxe toolkit. Part of the whole idea to get away from the slot restrictions of a container. Since we would not longer be slot limited, there would be no reason for different sizes of the same container except possibly for price reasons. In many cases I am likely to just do away with some of the "sizes" as combine items. In other cases were there is something "special" about the combine item, it will stay separate items.
6. yes, and possibly even from inside a bag. I am not sure it will be important to us to make you "take it out" It *may* be important to us, but it is not at the point of making a decision like that yet.
7. probably, with the above bit of info. The idea of making you have it "in hand" is not bad, which would be a primary secondary thing. But as mentioned we have not gotten that far in the idle thoughts
8. yes
9. probably. #1 the vendor sold traders satchels are going no-where, and they work dandy as bank bags. The only other equivalent is deluxe toolboxes, which may undergo some adjustment to make sure player made bags are preferable, but are likely to stay. Not real sure here. As said, we want the player made stuff to be preferable

Now I seem to understand all this a bit better , BUT still s always remain totaly confused by Tradeskills. I am in no way good at riddles or anything of the like and have more than often relied upon the good people here at EQTC to guide me in my Trades. If we have to buy books to learn this could be ok, but If I have to buy books to RE-learn all I already know like with the past tradeskill change where I forgot all my alchemy recipies< shiver >. I feel that I would not like it at all. As for the possible loss of experimentation, well I can understand some frustration there. All in all I think this could be good and maybe you could even take the new clicky thing and when you get your trophy you could hand it to the person who gives out the tradeskill trophy quest when completed and get back a nice combined thingie...lol.

the current plan would be to not affect what you already kn9ow, just "future" stuff.