Anyone ever complained of the inequality with ore splitting?

[Justicator Loremeister]

Has anyone ever thought of or complained to SoE about the disparity with ore? I mean, it always takes 3 items of a small size to get the next largest, but when you break a larger down to the next smaller size you only get one item (cept for small bricks going to 2 pieces). It's really not fair with this disparity, and I think it may be just something they overlooked, since they do a more logically thing with the small bricks example above.

So, as it stands:

3 small pieces -> 1 small brick :: 1 small brick -> 2 small pieces
3 small bricks -> 1 large brick :: 1 large brick -> 1 small brick
3 large bricks -> 1 block :: 1 block -> 1 large brick

I would propose to SoE that the ratio would be more correct if it was always:

3 -> 1 :: 1 > 2

or if they at least gave us some crumbs, so for example:

3 small bricks -> 1 large brick :: 1 large brick -> 1 small brick + 1-2 small pieces

This would give us some equality. I mean, to think that you break up a large brick and only get a small brick in return when it took 3 small bricks to make it - I'm sorry, but no blacksmith could be that incompetent and no matter what there would be pieces.

I complain about this because, as I'm sure many out there are doing, I've started working with acrylia and I really do not like the unfairness of this situation.

So, has anyone ever thought of or done a petition to SoE about this issue - it really hurts blacksmiths.

Thanks!

[Greymantle]

Yup..

Tons of us have sent in feedbacks. Part of the problem is an engine limitaion. You can only have one of a non-stackable item on the cursor at a time. So spliting can only give you one of the smaller pieces. Two ways around this. One make all metals smaller than block stack, or give back a large number of the stackable piece with one smaller brick. personally i would prefer the stacking.

[Rewde]

But, didn't they just change that so you can now have multiples of an item on your cursor now?

That being the case, they should be able to change it. Perhaps it is time for all of you to start that pettition over again.

[Eumerin]

They did, and fine steel weapons breakdown properly, but ore is still bugged.

Yes, the programming actually does return two pieces of ore. Reportedly, if you're grouped with someone who does this tradeskill 'combine', you'll actually see a message that they got two bricks.

But they'll still only end up with one.

[Maevenniia]

They did, and fine steel weapons breakdown properly, but ore is still bugged.

Yes, the programming actually does return two pieces of ore. Reportedly, if you're grouped with someone who does this tradeskill 'combine', you'll actually see a message that they got two bricks.

But they'll still only end up with one.

In that case, /bug it every time - they DO pay attention to /bug reports.

[kiztent]

They did, and fine steel weapons breakdown properly, but ore is still bugged.

Yes, the programming actually does return two pieces of ore. Reportedly, if you're grouped with someone who does this tradeskill 'combine', you'll actually see a message that they got two bricks.

But they'll still only end up with one.

In that case, /bug it every time - they DO pay attention to /bug reports.

Actually they changed that just before they fixed the stacking bug.

[Justicator Loremeister]

kiztent wrote:

Actually they changed that just before they fixed the stacking bug.

Changed what? Did they make it so that it doesn't give the message in group about getting multiple items? Or did they change that the respond to bugs

So, anyone have any ideas on how we get them to fix this issue with ore? Would a petition help at all do ya think?

thanks!

[Verdandi]

So, anyone have any ideas on how we get them to fix this issue with ore? Would a petition help at all do ya think?

Requesting changes = /feedback (or email to eqfeedback@soe.sony.com)
Requesting fixes to things not Working As Intended = /bug (or email to eqbugs@soe.sony.com)

Petitions are problematic. (I'm assuming you mean online ones, as opposed to the /petition command, which is not appropriate here.) Suffice to say that the developers have specifically stated that they would rather have individuals submit feedback on their own. I can't find a link to that statement but I know I remember hearing it somewhere or other. If I find it I'll edit it in here.