Yes, you would have to fortune it in the mining world.

 

I believe people are talking about the ECD equivilant of the total xp cost. @$4/orb you are looking at $76,000ECD, at $3/orb you are looking at $57,000ECD. People are trying to sell tools at the higher end, when in fact orb prices may drop a little after the 'panic' dies down and more people are going to spawners to bring in their own xp instead of paying the current costs.

In regards to the whole situation. I, initially, was floored at the xp amounts for each enchant. But there are so many variables, that I am on the fence watching how this plays out. It really doesn't affect me because when max tools were going for $20k-$30k, I found out it was a lot easier just to make them myself. So I did. Obviously those were different times. But each 'generation' thinks the newer generation has it 'easy'. When prices for these tools dropped to $5k each, I laughed.

Just because something seems expensive now, doesn't mean it is. Any new person who never saw a pick sell for $20k will think that anything over $5k is expensive. And while I think $50k is expensive, I have heard stories that this was the norm, even before I started. So who am I to complain?

The "lower" ranks are going to say the "higher" ranks want things to be too expensive to 'keep the power'. And the same thing on the other side. The "higher" ranks are saying the "lower" ranks are 'rising too fast'. I can see both sides. I'm glad it doesn't ride on me to make those final decisions.

The amount of xp per enchant is going to be balanced by the cost per orb, I think. And it is this balance that I am going to watch. If one is too high, it will affect the impression other. If one is too low, again, it will affect the impression of the other.

I have learned a lot by observing this play out. I will continue to watch.
Just my thoughts.

 

One more example of why this server is still going 3 years strong.
Change sometimes means temporary chaos but I am comforted by the fact that every decision made on this server is for our own good in the long term and both well researched and thought out before implementation.
Misjudgements have been made but corrections have always followed given time.
I thank you kuke (and I am sure others in the background) for all your time and effort you take to make a quality server for us to play on.

 

So I'm curious, do the ores we have gathered up over time need to be fortuned in the mining world? or is EXP strictly only in the mining world, as in we only get EXP from ores dug in the mining world?

 

Emau, well said. I love the part about how the rich think it is too easy and the poor think it is too hard - perfect assessment of every situation that happens on ECC!

 

"The price of da enchantments man, IT'S TOO DAMN HIGH"

 

You would have to fortune in the mining world.

Well, usually those who have a silk touch pick already have the top tier tools, or even an eff7.
A max silk touch pickaxe is the most expensive tool of them all, by that time your need for exp drops. The things you can do then are. Silk touching all the ores and fortuning them all in the mining world and get exp, silk touching in the mining world and fortuning in the main world and get no exp, use a fortune pick while mining and get exp.

I've had a couple of situations where those calculations were wildly incorrect due to minecraft version differences, so I decided to do my own testing instead. This ended up being very similar to the results obtained from the enchantmentcalculator.

 

Leveling up will take longer because they made level 30 1291 exp. This won't affect the way it's earned, it only affects the levels you earn, not the actual exp you earn.

 

Following this thread and really stressing my brain over all the various thoughts and ideas.

First, I am the #1 fan of limiting XP gains to mining world. I loathe that people are chopping up Legacy and Rising because it no longer matters. Thank you so much Kuke for addressing that issue. You are spot on!

As for adding XP gains back by mining, needless to say I think that is the best way to go and the most fun for all of us.

Now, pricing enchants... my brain hurts just thinking it thru. Even knowing that it would mean more work for the Mods (probably you, Kuke, sorry) I would approach XP pricing from another angle. I would start out with what I felt was a reasonable price for maxed tools. For me, that price is at the most $30k -$35k. It is just too painful to help out a new player now with good tools. I Hate the fact I cannot do that without screaming in financial pain, but I could bring myself to be more generous at this price level. So what would this mean?

It enchantment prices are based on the value of a tool instead of the value of XP then it would be enchantment prices that would have to change to reflect the XP market fluctuation. What I like about that is it would give Andrew a lot more control when things get chaotic. If players run berserk from rumors, fears, etc. Andrew could immediately step in and set the market straight, instead of having players in more control of costs. Assuming that Andrew has Kuke keep a tight watch on XP market trends and that Kuke can find the time to change prices fairly quickly, theoretically at least, we would only suffer a few days of crazy marketness. I would suspect, after a time things would stabilize considerably at whatever price level Andrew actually wants to happen - until a new update messes everything up again :) Of course, this would mean Kuke has to work his fanny off, especially now with such wildness going on.

I asked myself this question after reading the entire post: How long should a new, interested player take to gear himself up to a minimum of Resident or even Mayor with one or 2 maxed tools and maybe even some decent armor. A month is nice, but we ARE a harder, more challenging server, so, probably 2 months max assuming they do not spend real life money. Considering the age of most new players, younger people have a limit on patience. This is a delicate problem and I think Andrew is the one with the most experience in server success and he would have to work out how long, in his judgement a newer player will hang around trying to establish himself/herself.

I know one thing for certain, whatever is decided I will hang around. I confess sometimes I lose my temper and huff and puff, but this server is where I want to be. It has the people, the challenge and the leadership I want from MY favorite game.

 

I think this statement here is the cause of the inflated prices that people are complaining about. The problem is that you had already calculated that on average it would cost 3500 xp to get an efficiency 5 pick, well 2784 to get an efficiency 5 pick, including the combination. The demand for them is irrelevant because if there were no supply out there and an infinite demand, you could currently spend 2784 xp to get and eff 5 pick.

The same goes for all of the other rare and high demand tools. Even if there is no supply and infinite demand, I could theoretically create said tool for the initial experience calculation before using multipliers. So, I think the multipliers are unnecessary, too subjective and the reason why people are seeing the costs being basically doubled.

I also think that the base system of equations for determining the base value of enchantments is not quite right. Even though on average it would take 2784 xp to get an eff 5 pick, on average when I create 2 eff 5 picks, I would also get a silk pick. So, on average in order to get a silk pick and 2 eff 5 picks, I would spend about 5569 xp. So, if the only picks that I were interested in were these, I would expect an eff 5 pick to cost 1500 xp and a silk pick to cost 3000 xp, which if you wanted 2 eff 5 picks and 1 silk pick it would cost you 6000 total which is more than what it would currently cost to get the same.

The bottom line is that you created 27 enchantments for a total of 22275 xp. Out of those 27 enchantments you got 16 eff 4, 4 silk, x unb 3, and y fort3. So, the cost of an eff 4 pick SHOULD be based on solving the system of equations:
16 * Eff4Cost + 4 * SilkCost + x * Unb3Cost + y * Fort3Cost = 22275.
16 * Eff4Cost = 4 * SilkCost = x * Unb3Cost = y * Fort3Cost.
For this calculation I will assume that there were x=20 and y=4.
That would make an Eff4Cost=22275/64 = ~350, SilkCost=22275/16 = ~1400, Unb3Cost=22275/80 = ~280, Fort3Cost=22275/16 = ~1400.

So, a Eff5 Unb3 ST pick should cost 2400 xp plus the cost of combines. At 2400 xp with a rate of 4k/set that would be just a little under 12k for a max pick, which used to be the going rate, oddly enough.

Now you might say that 350 xp for a straight eff 4 pick is a little low. But, in reality it isn't because in reality you get so many of them that they aren't really worth a full enchant because they are so prolific. This whole set of equations actually takes into account that often you get 2 of the enchantments. This doesn't however take into account that with the signs, you can't get the wrong thing. If you wanted to doubled these xp costs, you would get very close to $30k for a maxed pick.

I'm not 100% sure that I set up the equations correctly, but, I'm pretty sure that I actually did. Your initial approach at the problem was good, kuke, it just didn't take into account that though I can get 4 ST out of 27 picks, I also get other stuff that is mostly useful out of those 27 picks.

Finally, I'm not sure whether or not the enchant signs are set up to give multiple enchants or not. But, I think they just shouldn't give multiple enchants because that would take away one of the reasons to get Ext Commands Plus.

 

P.S. I agree that a Eff3 enchant should be worth basically 1/2 an Eff4 and all other lower level enchants should be the same. However, I'd probably round up.

 

If you added exp to mining in the minin world, people wouldstill mine in legacy/rising and bring their ores to the mining world to fortune.

I don't understand the problem with minin in legacy or rising. It is all underground and no one will ever see it. As long as the surface stays beautiful, who cares about ores being gone underfround?

 

I am not disputing the prices. I am disputing the process in which the prices were obtained. Even if you only did one enchant per item and not the whole multiple enchant thing (which is a huge error to begin with), put very simply, and I am trying to make this as simply as possible:

"I then took the amount of exp I wasted enchanting. (27*825 = 22275) and divide that by the amount of the enchantment I had."

What I want to know is this:
1) How much XP did you use?
2) What enchants did you have after you used that XP?
3) If you were to get the SAME enchants with the new system, how much XP would that cost?

I'll make it even easier. Just pick ONE enchant on each of the 27 items. Just one. Since we know you used 22,275 XP, even if your "pricing" on expensive enchants is 2x what you think it would cost to get a particular enchant, then your total XP in the new system should not exceed 45,000 XP for the 27 Enchants you did. And that is just for ONE enchant per item at your "premium" 2x cost.

Again, not even including the whole multiple enchant thing (which is HUGE), the method used was extremely flawed in my opinion. The way you priced it, you took your batch of enchantments and said "If I was going for Y Enchantment, what would it cost to get it? If it wasn't exactly what I needed, the item/enchant is worth zero." This was not how enchanting was done before the signs.

 

-Edit-

 

I didn't exactly calculate an average, I calculated something that's above average. Because it's closer to what it used to be before Mojang completely changed enchanting around.

Demand is certainly not irrelevant. There is a supply, and that supply comes in the form of exp. The demand for specific enchantments and the supply of exp are directly related with this change. If a tool is in higher demand, it would only make sense that it's more expensive.

​

They do give multiple enchants. I also don't see a reason to change that. There is a point where you can't combine any more due to level restrictions, and anvils also come with an exp price of their own. (to get a max tool from 3 separate max enchants you pay around 2k exp)

 

huh, it seems like the first part of my post didn't get posted. I'll post it later.

 

This is what I was disputing in my post, that the process used to get the prices is flawed.

I complete agree with this statement and my system of equations is an attempt to take into account that just because you were wanting Y doesn't diminish the value of X.

I don't disagree with increasing the price somewhat due to the fact that you can get Y without getting X and you don't have to sell X to get back the worth of X.

Just in case anyone thinks I'm arguing for personal gain, I have 2 double chests full of nice enchanted items and 1 full of enchanted books that I could get a lot of money for if the prices remain as they are. I'm arguing that if the new sign system is to cost similar to the old e-table system that the base prices are miscalculated. I also don't need to enchant items pretty much because I have all that I need, so, I'm not arguing this just to save me money.

The truth is that with the sign system, people will only get what they want, so supply of all enchanted items will go down because people won't be enchanting for Y and getting lots of X. So, the cash price for purchasing X directly will naturally go up. The only thing preventing the cash price rising too high is the sign cost in XP to create X coupled with the availability of XP.

 

P.S. Kuke, I think you did a great first shot at this and it is most certainly better to price things too high initially than too low. I just think some additional factors should be taken into account to make things more in line with how they were with e-tables.