Backpacks on Test: Now Bigger

Discussion in 'Tradeskill Discussion' started by ARCHIVED-Xalmat, Nov 6, 2009.

  1. ARCHIVED-Karrane1 Guest

    I guess I just dont see where all the hate for strongboxes is coming from. Its bad enough that whatever market we had for them will be gone. There isnt much a carpenter sells regularly besides boxes. I dont understand why everyone seems to think that there needs to be some sort of penalty added to a player for using one. Whatever happend to player choice? I am very happy for all the tailors out there. It is about time that the backpacks had some decent slot numbers in them.......................... I just never thought it would be at the total expense of the carpenter. I never mind "giving" to help other ppl "get" but I guess I just never thought I would have to "give" all and "get" nothing.
  2. ARCHIVED-Kigneer Guest

    DominoDev wrote:
    Let's see...A rare Fir lumber costs around 20g or such. Fir speciality containers (except for salesman's crates) selling for 3g a piece.
    Why they're so cheap? Because no one buys the lower level speciality containers anymore. If your main (which is most of the players in EQ2) has the plat (which now with plat inflation they do), they just buy mahogany or whatever cheapest Ebony they can find. Same with strongboxes. Before I maxed my carp, I bought redwoods and bypassed the lower level containers as switching so many out and trying to sell them is pointless (why buy a 5g 24 slot strongbox when 10g can get you 36?).
    That market already collapsed. It did as soon as TSO came out. Don't even bother making containers less than 80 now, as space is the premium and there's too much plat to spend. So much of it around you have to do something with it...have enough plat in my sales containers now to buy a GH with 5 amentities alone!
  3. ARCHIVED-Sorin Spellcaster Guest

    Two possible solutions
    1) Allow backpack to be given stats, imbued etc and not strongboxes.
    2) Change all strongboxes to backpacks and then reintroduce strongboxes at a later date.
    The new strongboxes can only be opened in no shared banks slots and when opened look similar to the character inventory screen, so that they store 6 backpacks and as many non backpacks as there are item slots in you inventory.
    You could then at a right click option to swap all items contained with items worn.
    Sorin
  4. ARCHIVED-Gungo Guest

    I will say this with this change it will be easier for me to go to the bank and switch out my adeventure bags with my crafter bags. There is really no need for strongboxes in inventory or bank.
    As much as you think its to late to fix the box/bag issue. I think you should.
  5. ARCHIVED-OrcSlayer96 Guest

    As a Paladin raider that has reset his crafting character many times(Armorer, Tailor, Carpenter, Sage, and now Alchemist), i have a slightly different viewpoint than many posters on the thread. With the armor sets and variety of potions/baubles that seem to add weekly to my inventory storage, i find the proposed additional slots a godsend. As far as the Tailor versus Carpenter debate, let's be honest here, for quite awhile, carpenters have owned the storage market as the vast majority of playerbase can deal with the weight restriction in favor of 50% more storage that crates give them in inventory/bank/vault storage.

    I see some Carpenters posting that any change to backpacks will mean a devastating loss of revenue to them even tho they fail to meantion that repair kits are still bought quite regularly and unlike crates are expendable so are a recurring revenue for them. People buy imbued altars and salesman crates as they want to broker things on the market. There is always guild halls out there and 5 room houses that need crafted furniture(last 2 updates has tossed up some very nice recipes that are in demand). Crafted vault expanders that increase vault/salesman crate capacity by 1(max increase of 1 to cap of 6 slots total) are bought quite often for those that dont want 5 room houses and the lag that can be associated with it.

    Instead of all of these restrictions many posters have made so far on the bag/box debate, i propose something similar to what is already in the game now = speciality boxes similar to display crates where the total slot capacity is roughly 20% higher than Backpacks but you can only have those type of items in them. These boxes would replace strongboxes on the carpenter recipe books, and the weight on them would be small, like 10 pounds or so, as the real factor for most people is storage capacity versus weight reduction. Examples of the specialty boxes are below, and the estimated stoarge would assume that the backpacks would have 40 slots so these would be 50 slots.

    Armor and Shield Boxes: Armor and shields of any type.
    Weapon Boxes: Weapons, bows and ammunition.
    Potion Boxes: Potions and poisons.
    Jewelry Boxes: Jewelry, baubles (charms/totems), adornments, transmuted components and cloaks.

    The backpacks would have at least a 10 slot difference comparing rare to rare, but allow anything in them with weight reduction, the specialty boxes have more capacity and double the weight compared to a backpack and only allow those item types they were made for. People have more choices on bank/vault/inventory, carpenters have more recipes and storage items that are cloned backpacks, and tailors finally become market contenders on storage. The above specialty boxes could be tweaked as far what they could hold, just using the display case ones as a example and a change like this would probably have to wait till expansion, but i know alot of players that wouldn't mind something like this versus the current backpack versus strongbox system we have now. If this was released at expansion, any current strongboxes stay as is and players then choose between the specialty boxes versus backpacks, based on their classes and playing habits.
  6. ARCHIVED-TheSpin Guest

    The Way it Should Be
    People use backpacks for inventory and strongboxes for bank/house.


    Easiest Ways to Encourage This
    1. Make backpacks more desireable in inventory by increasing their storage (This is what is being done right now) DONE
    2. Make strongboxes less desireable in inventory by increasing their weight (X10)
    3. Keep strongboxes Preferred in bank by increasing their storage by 2 slots (mastercrafted size would not increase, so having mastercrafted would only give 2 more slots... but you KNOW people who need mastercrafted now are still gonna need mastercrafted even if it only gives 2 more slots)
    *side note* mastercrafted backpack would only be an increase of 2, so, using this suggestion, a mastercraftd backpack would be the same capacity as a handcrafted strongbox.

    as I mentioned above, a solution to keep people from complaining about the changes would be to add a merchant for a few months that trades strongboxes for backpacks,
  7. ARCHIVED-Boyar Guest

    When I originally saw this, my strongest impression was the injustice being done to strongboxes, as bags would have a clear advantage. While this is still true, as I pondered the larger picture I realized that the 'unfairness' really doesn't matter so much.
    Up 'til now, at lower levels, STR based classes have always had a large advantage over weaklings in their capacity to carry loot and useful items. While not a horrible handicap, it does affect players. When the loot rolls and your bags are full, often as not the item will end up going to someone else in the reroll. In many cases, even at 80 mages either have to adorn or spec for some strength to be able to carry all boxes, possibly foregoing benefits better suited to their main role, where melee based characters get this benefit hand in hand with their ideal setup. This change will balance this.
    This will give carpenters some competition, true, but most carpenters (at least on my server) already eschew boxmaking in favor of the many more lucrative products available to our profession (my Carp was my first lvl 80). Tailors, on the other hand, have a pretty hard life for merchanting; we carpenters can afford to let them take over our primary drudge work item. (That and I'm almost finished with my tailor :) ) This will also provide a check/balance on market prices - if prices soar on bags the box-makers will dust off their tools, and vice versa.
    While I don't see this as a perfectly equitable solution for the crafters, I believe it will provide a fairer benefit to the consumers.
  8. ARCHIVED-Meirril Guest

    Kigneer wrote:
    When it comes to guild halls, plat isn't an issue. Status is the limiter in every case. Either you need to earn more status to gain more levels, or you need to earn more status to pay for the amenities you want and the rent. Coin comes from the process of earning status. Well, unless your actually going to craft all your status. Then you'd actually need to earn some coin too. But that's the slow method of earning status.
    Either way, unwanted products even made from rare materials in any tier sell for less than the raw material. That is a fundamental aspect of any economy. Even in tier 8 specialty containers are not in high demand and should be priced lower than a sales crate. Quite simply put, very few people would gain any benifit from a specialty container vs the loss of general broker space. Honestly, how many people generate over 80 slots worth of the same basic product? Even out of the dedicated crafters, not a whole lot of them. Most would be just as happy with a sales crate as a specialty container.
    Its also the reason I'm not supporting the creation of more specialty containers for inventory use. Its extra inventory space that you can't use 90% of the time. Honestly, what good is that? Who carries 40+ spaces of potions? Who has 40+ armor peices on them? Who has 40+ jewelery peices on them? Every space you have that isn't being used, is a space wasted. If its below 36, you could be using a regular container instead and have extra space for anything.
  9. ARCHIVED-Cinnimon Guest

    Since these changes are happening what about the hq bags or quested backpacks too? At least make these more wanted like giving the backpacks that are from the various collections through out different zones a weight reduction perhaps? Even more so then crafted like 25 to 35? The hq evil eye bag give more slots like 28 and more of a weight reduction like 55% and their is another one selo's from poet's palace that would be nice to have more slots added along with a weight reduction similar to evil eye bag? The tinkerer's bag is fine. but if you wanted to add more slots I would be happier. This change to the crafted backpacks will effect the desirability of these as well if they don‘t get some attention too.
  10. ARCHIVED-OrcSlayer96 Guest

    Meirril wrote:
    Just want to clarify on this point, in the above post when i stated the speciality boxes, the main intent is use in the bank/vaults more than inventory, most adventurers will not need 50 pieces of armor in their inventory, but with all of the Achievements and quests and other appearance gear let alone resist gear/dps gear i can see most players using at least 1-2 of these boxes easily. Heck, in the last month alone i have picked up 2 different sets of armor from the night of the dead live even and additional set from the spire events. This is additional to frostfell and crafting armor and so forth. On the jewelry box, counting the small army of cloaks and baubles/charms (the eye illisions alone to represent different races acounts for at least 16 slots), and any you may have from LON loot cards means that you can easily use another couple jewelry boxes. Like i said the box types were suggestions, so a potion box could be redesigned as a harvesting box, which i am sure quite a few players would be interested in, especially the ones that harvest shrubs..:)
    IMO, if you have to make it coded that boxes can only be in bank/vault/broker and bags inventory only then you are saying that is only way to make boxes sell. Instead i would have it where the advantages of boxes is more capacity for item types while bags are smaller capacity but handle anything in them. Newer players may start off with bags in everything then as they progress thru content they buy speciality boxes to enlarge their hilding capacity, so everybody gains a benefit and people have choices. I never did understand why we have 2 of the same thing pretty much between strong boxes and backpacks when we could have 1 general container and several containers with added benefits and restrictions.
  11. ARCHIVED-Yongqi Guest

    I didn't notice if someone posted this or not. but will this change existing boxes/bags that are made to the new size or will it be for newly made items after the patch?
  12. ARCHIVED-Mythal_EQ2 Guest

    Here's an idea... though I don't know how viable it would be code-wise:
    Make backpacks, instead of (or in addition to) the weight reduction, offer larger stack sizes, similar to the Guild Hall supply crate amenity (though obviously not allowing for 20k stacks). This would obviously require some changes in code (if it is at all possible), but would make for some specialization and choice-making in our intentory and bank management.
    This way crates, while still weighing more, would get, say 2 or 4 slots more than backpacks, and would be used to carry (or storage) non-stackable items (extra armor pieces, house items, etc).
    Backpacks, on the other hand, could be used (even with 2 or 4 less slots) to carry harvestables, potions, crafting supplies etc., if the stack sizes allowed for items in the backpacks were 50% - 100% more than elsewhere (i.e. potion stacks in backpacks would hold between 150 and 200 potions per stack instead of the normal 100).
    Again though, this might be a nightmare to code so...

    D.
  13. ARCHIVED-feldon30 Guest

    My solution (to the players):

    What's done is done, and it would not improve the game in any measurable way to punish people for using strongboxes.

    Next you'll be asking to hard-cap carry weight to 150 and suddenly make weight matter again in EQ2.

    Quit trying to come up with ways to make existing players angry. I thought people wanted EQ2 devs to stop nerfing the game?
  14. ARCHIVED-Jack Orb Guest

    DominoDev wrote:
    How about making them switchable through examination in the same way HQ rewards and now mounts can be examined and changed into house items? Even if they were to become non-container furniture items surely that would be better than rendering them pointless.
  15. ARCHIVED-celestina936 Guest

    Karrane1 wrote:
    Oh, my..... my carpenter regularly sells furniture plus all the other little gems. And there is a repeat biz since peeps get tired of their furniture, so they remake their house or room and buy more furniture. She's also busy with seasonal items for the guild halls, too. She hasn't sold a strongbox in a very very long time.
    My tailor doesn't sell many backpacks, neither. Like strongboxes they are a one time sale. Most of my tailor's crafting is in adornments and a few tiers of clothing or some dress clothing. She is probably the least used of my 6 crafters. Even my woodworker gets more biz than my tailor including repeat biz.
  16. ARCHIVED-Feyannwn Guest

    My biggest problem with the game was space! Over the years, so many things have chnaged, stacking capablity, the ability to increase STR, the size of boxes...ect...ect
    The down fall, was some of the classes that I play couldn't carry all the things that I wanted them to. So the largest backpack was used till each toon gained the appropriate STR needed.
    Needless to say, from my strongest to my (so-called) weakest toon they all carry 5 redwood strong boxes and 1 wantia artisan satchel and this works fine for me.
    To go and change my ability to do what I do would be unfair at this time. Do I feel sorry for those that can't carry the boxes and fell that they are at a disadvantage, sure, but at the same time, the dynamics are in the game to buff up your STR and carry what you want.
    From a RP and realistic ppoint of view...well that doesn't work at all...but until we can get a pack horse/mule or a never-ending bag, I deal with it.
    I have far too many things to carry around!
  17. ARCHIVED-OrcSlayer96 Guest

    Maybe we need to look at this in a simpler solution, what if we removed the rare recipe for strongboxes, made the common strongbox of that tier equal to the rare backpack on storage and the common backpack 2 slots less than either of them? The common strongbox retains its 100 pound weight, but uses common materials. The rare material backpack yield same storage space but with 20% weight reduction and 5 pounds of weight, the cost is getting the rare for that backpack versus common raws on the strongbox. The common backpack is 2 slots less than either one and has no weight reduction, but only weighs 5 pounds. This yields desire for both storage types and nobody has to deal with restrictions of where to place this at. The player decides how much it is worth having the rare backpack versus the common strongbox or if no rares they may go with the common backpack in inventory till they pickup the rares. No need for coding on restrictions where to place the storage items or tossing negative run speed on things...:)
  18. ARCHIVED-Cinnimon Guest

    I can't see why some would still want to carry strongboxes around weather they have the strength or not. I know I wouldn't after this change for I mentor a lot. So how many will swap out? A lot will pick backpacks over the boxes for this purpose too. That is why some are here complaining about it. There is no doubt about it that this change goes from one unbalance to another unbalance. I love the change to backpacks but I see this effecting sells for strongboxes even for banks/storage for a lot of players swap out boxes to do certain things so the same desirability will be their but it will be backpacks instead.
    Weight of the strongboxes seem to be main factor here with complaints but even if you do reduce it, it will not make them more desirable either after this change but removing two slots from backpacks is not something we want either for we want that option to carry more useless stuff. Reduce the weight of strongboxes or remove two slots from backpacks are not the best way to appease our complaints on this I think. so....
    The suggestions you gave Domino are not the best viable choices to fix our complaints on this dilemma so give another one that seems more reasonable perhaps?
  19. ARCHIVED-Dalannae Guest

    Uxian@Splitpaw wrote:
    We still need the space for storage in banks and house vaults. I have a provi I'm leveling up and 8 her bank slots are slated for the raws my other toons and some friends have sent her to help her level up and even with the highest level strongbox I'm going to find it hard to hold everything. I use 7 of the shared bank slots for the overflow different raws used by all my other toons for their tradeskill leveling if redwood strongbox(I believe that is the largest in the game so far) wern't there I couldn't do it. not to mention the storage needed for other thing like decorations for the house and master's and equipment for later adventure levels. so what was this about rendering strong boxes pointless.
  20. ARCHIVED-OrcSlayer96 Guest

    Cinnimon wrote:
    If this is in response to my last post, you may have misread part of it, i wanted the strongboxes changed so only a common harvest recipe exists(no rare needed to make) that has the same storage capacity as the Rare harvest Backpack(requiring the rare pelt to make). The common backpack would exist(no rare needed but no weight reduction either) but have 2 less slots then either strongbox or rare backpack. The rare backpack has 20% weight reduction, so theer is something for everyone...:)