(Any)Ore breakdown bug

[Quinner Sparrowhawk]

It was mentioned in another thread and I would like more verification. Are All ore blocks/bricks supposed to break down into 2 smaller parts? For example, should a block of acrylia ore breakdown into 2 large bricks of ore? If so, could people make a concerted effort to /feedback this? If not, shouldn't this be changed and could people make a concerted effort to /feedback this?

Thank you for your time and support!

[Gryfalia]

No, it doesn't and, while it might seem logical, probably can't.

I (and many others) think the reason has to do with the fact that the game doesn't seem to know how to give you two of the same unstackable item on your pointer at the same time. So it can give you 2 small pieces of ore (cause they stack) but not 2 small bricks.

Maybe something has changed, but that explanation has always made sense to me..

Gryfalia

[kiztent]

True, but it doesn't answer the question. I have heard but not verified that if you group with someone who is breaking down ore (and smelting), there will be multiple brick yields which are lost because of the stacking bug.

I keep meaning to verify this, but never bother.

[xaanru]

That USED to be true. However, SOE, in their diligent efforts to fix all bugs, has corrected this.

They changed the messages, so it only says you get one now :roll:

[Solastar]

Easy Solution

The solution could be as simple as

Large brick yields: 1 small brick + 2 small pieces.

Block yields: 1 large brick + 1 small brick + 2 small pieces.

My initial thought was that a large brick could give 1 small brick + THREE small pieces - the logic being that these could, if desired, be recombined up to a small brick, thus giving the desired yield of 2 small bricks. The problem with this, though, is if you were wishing to split a large brick down into small pieces, this method would yield 5 instead of the 4 that SOE originally intended (ie large brick into 2 small bricks, 2 small bricks into 4 small pieces).

So the above method will give you less than or equal to SOE's intended yield but more than we currently get. (equal to SOE's intended if ultimately splitting any larger item down into small pieces but less if you're after large/small bricks from blocks and/or large bricks).

[Quinner Sparrowhawk]

I would even settle for a block breaking down into 4 small pieces. It would make sense that there would be small usable pieces left over after chiseling(sp) the block down.

As a caveat, It would be nice to make the small pieces a no-fail result of attempting to break a block/brick down.

[OberonMiM]

unfortunately a block breaking down into 4 peices would be REALLY bad for doing stuff with velium (imagine you have a block and need large bricks for rings). Would get VERY expensive on tempers to reassemble the blocks.

I would just settle for different types of chissels.

Note if an item broke down into 2 of the previous types you would still loose ore so its not a 100% conversion which verant hates(breaks down in to 2 requires 3 to recreate)

[calidorn2]

SS combines leaves you with an anvil hammer and product on your cursor so why it would have trouble just because they are the same type of item I do not know.Also isnt there the mage summonned arrow and quiver thing that gives you multiple stacks of arrows on your cursor.
It is more likely that it is their way of controlling the amount of ores in the game.If one block ended up in 2 large, then those 2 into 4 small, then those into 8 pieces, you would just have so much ore in the game it would be insane and they would have to nerf drop rates.
While I completely agree with your viewpoint I hope you can see mine.
I do find it laughable that one vendor will sell small bricks of velium for 30pp and want 35pp for a small piece though.No more ignorant than people who want 25pp per leather padding or 15pp per silk swatch I guess.

[Gryfalia]

It would be trouble because everything has a number identifier. Things that stack have a built in characteristic that allows for more than 1 to be in the same place. Items that are the same (like 2 large bricks of velium) such a situation wasn't anticipated, so it wasn't set up that way.

As we know, of course, you can get more than 1 item of different types on the cursor, but they have different identifiers..

Or at least that's the way we think it works..

Gryfalia

[Zeralenn]

In researching the smithing guide, I went through the expense of trying this with all the normal ores plus several cultural ones. I started out with 1 block of normal ore, MQ ore, HQ ore, adamantite ore, brellium, mithril, velium, and acrylia (the things I do to prove a point):

Every type of ore breaks down this way:

1 block yields 1 large brick
1 large brick yields 1 small brick
1 small brick yields 2 pieces

I don't think it has anything to do with the stacking bug. Think about when you do shadowscream; when you succeed, you get your shadowscream item, your Vah Shir anvil, and your humming luclinite mallet. Three items, all nonstackable.

...Zera

[Kaysha Soulsinger]

Zera, those are items with a uniquely different ingame item ID. In fact, there's a summon spell out there that summons a 4-slot bag and 3 stacks of Shurikens. Now initially they only could do 1 stack ... so what did Verant do? They created this Shuriken three times in the database, each instance with a different item ID. Voila, three stacks of Shurikens at the cursor.

To more closely examine your example:

The Shadowscream armor produces three items: let's take Shadowscream Steel Tunic for example as the armor piece, the Anvil and the Hammer.

Then we have on the cursor:
- Item ID 29832 (the Tunic)
- Item ID 29816 (the Vah Shir anvil)
- Item ID 29824 (the Humming Luclinite Mallet)

All have quantity 1, since they are non-stackable. They are unique. Now when breaking down for instance a Block of HQ Ore, the cursor should hold the following:
- Item ID 10469 (the Large Brick of HQ Ore)
- Item ID 10469 (the Large Brick of HQ Ore)
- Item ID 7052 (the Smithing Chisel)

Each set with quantity 1 as well. However, the second instance of the Large Brick of HQ Ore interferes with the first - it is exactly the same as the first instance, down to the Item ID number. For reasons unknown, the game obliterates the second of these instances, only to keep the first one.

The same thing happens when you are foraging (even with the stackables); you cannot add the same unique item ID to your cursor if it is already present there, even when they are stackable and the stack on your cursor is not filled up - they just don't add. The second item you forage is lost. And it happens as well with Imbueing and Enchanting items; if you create something that is already on your cursor, it's bye bye for the thing you created. The game simply does not allow identical items to be on the cursor at the same time.

Note that there is a difference between
- Item ID 22229, Quantity 2 (Small Piece of HQ Ore)

and
- Item ID 22229, Quantity 1
- Item ID 22229, Quantity 1

The first is possible, the second is not.

Also, when you zone, EVERYTHING on your cursor, except for the very item on the top that is displayed, is lost.

[solithan]

breakdown bug

I agree with the identifiers and the problem there in. I wonder why they never decided to have items dump to inventory. The most simple solution from what I can tell would be the one mentioned above to just add small peices or whatever. At anyrate some /feedback couldn't hurt.

[Quinner Sparrowhawk]

What I meant in the breakdown was as follows

1 block= 1 lg brick and 4 sm pices
1 lg brick = 1 sm brick and 2 sm pieces

[Taraddar]

Aye the game definitely CAN NOT handle 2 of the same items on the cursor at the same time. I've lost some rather expensive components while imbueing this way. Miss a click and don't get it dropped into inventory and cast the spell again and you just used up a set of reagents and still only have 1 item on your cursor. Try it out with any imbue spell if you doubt me. Altho I do recommend something with cheap store bought components because you will lose one set.

This also seemed to be the cause of "failed" CE combines. What I noticed in the couple times I had it happen was that it lagged in putting the ce from the combine on my cursor and I ctrl clicked on the stack and picked one up from the stack instead of dropping the one that was suppose to be on my cursor on the stack. Then when the ce showed up on my cursor poof can't have 2 of the same thing so one less ce than you expected.

My sugguestions was to just automatically break down the second brick any time it wasn't resulting in stackable peices. So if you broke down a block you'd end up with 2 large bricks but that second large brick can't show up on the cursor so it gets broken down to 2 small bricks. So now you've got 1 large brick, 2 small bricks. Opps second small brick can't show up either so break that down. So now you've got a large brick, a small brick and 2 stackable peices. If your going all the way down to peices this gives you the exact same amount as if they would have stacked correctly with just less combines. If you where aiming for large or small bricks you can either combine up, sell or try and trade with someone who needs peices instead.

[calidorn2]

I can see your point with the numbers and at the time I posted I was thinking of the mage spell that summons a quiver and 3 stacks of arrows to your cursor.If like you say they have changed the item numbers to allow this to happen then there is only one reason they will not do it for non stacking ores....Because then they will need to go back through every recipe involving ores and recode to allow for a new item number.We can all imagine the chaos if they missed a few recipes .The sudden spate of DNC bugs would be astronomical.

They could of course make now unstackable ores stack.That would fix most issues with a minimum of recoding.Unlikely though as that would change the dynamics of farming said unstackable ores.Really depends how they feel the influx of ore to the world is going and how much of an impact doubling the amount of new ore would effect things.
I still think breaking ores down too efficiently like you want will put too much ore in the game.

I suspect they did initially have it with a block breaking into 2 large but with the bug the easiest way for them to fix it was to simply change the message and continue to have one being destroyed upon creation.

Also 2 items with the same name but different ids could not stack could they ??Can you swap the summonned shurikans around to different stacks ?? If you can then they must know a fix for this.Only points to it being too much work again.

As to the foraging and imbueing and vials dissappearing.Well that would be to stop people setting up a macro.Some items can be done such as enchanting ores as they drop to your inventory but on the whole they cannot.Can you imagine if people could park in a zone put one type of stackable, foragable item on their cursor and go to bed.Wake up unload the stack on your cursor rinse and repeat.Having to unload every one ensures you are at the keyboard.