Solution to Lower Reagent Cost and a bump for the UO economy

[Zan186]

Ok it would be extremely unpopular to make LRC useless. So here is the solution:
LRC works just fine, but the damage from spells is variable. If you were to carry reagents the damage would always be the maximum. For example if earthquake normally does 60 to 100 damage with a LRC suit, the range from using reagents would be 80 to 100.
Allow stacks of reagents to be insured, this would increase the cost of death and hence and to the gold sink.

LRC is one of the biggest causes of inflation. No one really buys reagents anymore except for alchemy. When Mages and Necro's had to buy regs constantly it consumed a ton of gold.

The major problem that players have with LRC is the inconvience and break of action to "re Reg". If you want to reduce the effectiveness of lrc and make reagents a bought commodity again you are going to have to appease the masses! One way would be to allow a blessed reagent bag that would hold a limited amount of regs. Maybe 50 of each? Then you could reduce LRC to 50% efficiency. Yes it will be groaned a bit but with the ability to continue fighting in battles without being looted and forced to return to a base to "re reg" players would accept it.

 

[Guest]

It would be nice if one of the Devs posted the major gold sinks and relative amounts.
We had one post where one of the Dev's listed the top two gold sinks as insurance and player run vendor fee's.
Even before LRC, I spent very little on reagents, and all my chars had magery. Howevere i know a lot of folks who burned through reagents in such quantity that they would actually buy from player vendors who would add a markup for acting as the middleman to gather the large quantities purchased. Double gold sink.

 

[Guest]

Refer to the post about adding a casino. Best gold sink idea by far in my opinion.

 

[DrMcguilicudy]

The current gold sinks are fine. The economy is starting to devalue itself.

 

[imported_spiderpig]

Using regs already gives a % increase in damge. I forget what the amount is 10%? People often use the cat statues to keep the regs blessed. Makes their suit better with mods other than lrc if they are willing to reload regs at times.

 

[TheflY of LS]

Unless something has changed recently, there is no difference in using a 100% LRC suit as opposed to consuming physical reagents.

 

[Guest]

Suggestion: LRC is changed to "Arcane". Each item currently with LRC loses LRC property and gains "Arcane Charges: (lrc % x 10)"

A full 100% LRC suit would translate to a suit with 1000 arcane charges, or 1000 spells could be cast before requiring recharging. Each arcane gem could recharge UP TO 10 charges, so 100+ arcane gems required for 1 full suit refill. Players with no crafting skill would recharge between 4-8 per gem, while players with GM tailoring, smithing, or tinkering would be able to recharge a full 10 charges per gem.

Gems can be found through normal means (hunting exodus dungeon monsters) or buying them at one of a few different NPC locations: NPC jewelers sell for 100 gold per, gargoyles in Ver Lor Reg sell for about 85 gold per. This makes a full suit recharge of 1000 spells cost approximately 8500 - 10,000 gold for a crafter and up to double that for a non-crafter. Prices would even out (with profit margin added in) to approximately 12k -15k gold.

Players can use fewer Arcane pieces and get the full effect of arcane gear by carrying gems on them or by going back to recharge more often, or can seek out items with much higher arcane charges to build a suit that will last longer than 1000 spells (could probably get close to 150-200% LRC with all the items out there, eh?)

This allows players to still fight without regs, creates a goldsink akin to chivalry (only more people use magery so it would make more difference over time), and still preserves the value of LRC items, if not even increasing the value of high LRC items (with all the artifacts with over 20% lrc now lrc items actually have gone down in price as its easier to build a 100% suit these days)

On top of all of that, this also creates a profession for mid-level players to be gem gatherers and also adds value to a seldom-used area of the game (Exodus dungeon and surrounding area).

Also, newer or "younger" players would be able to go hunt for their own gems to power thier suits, so nobody need whine about this "cost" being too hard on newb players.... using arcane gear would be a premium and/or a priviledge, so nobody is saying they should do that instead of just using normal reagents)

There you go... flame away.

 

[Guest]

10% bonus for using reagents? I think it made it as far as the test server at some point last year, but was dropped from the final publish (I haven't actually tested).

I couldn't find a reference, but did stumble across the old proficiency system design notes that spoke of a road not taken.

 

[Mr Artifact]

no thank you i like it the way it is now and that should not change in my opinion sorry but thats how i feel.

 

[Elric_Soban]

cap lrc at 75. end of story

 

[Guest]

Too late to change LRC. Find another sink.

 

[Guest]

Lower Reagent Cost does not need "FIXED" ie. changed cause someone doesnt like it. We may as well ask them to remove all the items introduced in the past 9 years and change armageddon to actually kill every animal, monster, and player in the shard it is cast in like it worked in the single player ultimas.

It amazes me what people are complaining about. sheesh.

 

[Guest]

First off, there's nothing really wrong with LRC, there are many many things that need to be fixed first.

Second, huh? So what happens if your wearing a 100% LRC suit and have reagants? You'd cast at max damage and not spend any reagants, so basically everyone would carry 1 of each regeant. Not sure how that would help the situation any.

Alternatly if you say you must cast using reagants, how do you force yourself to do so if you have any piece of LRC armor on?

Interesting idea, not feasible to implement in UO.

~Rai

 

[fred252]

Gotta throw in a NO to this idea too.

LRC is fine the way it is.

I am not trying to be negative about all of these ideas. I just don't want TPTB to read these hair brain ideas and think that everyone wants them.

 

[Zan186]

<blockquote><hr>

First off, there's nothing really wrong with LRC, there are many many things that need to be fixed first.

Second, huh? So what happens if your wearing a 100% LRC suit and have reagants? You'd cast at max damage and not spend any reagants, so basically everyone would carry 1 of each regeant. Not sure how that would help the situation any.

Alternatly if you say you must cast using reagants, how do you force yourself to do so if you have any piece of LRC armor on?

Interesting idea, not feasible to implement in UO.

~Rai

[/ QUOTE ]

Fact is LRC is a problem. Most people don't want any changes because of convience. Yeah drastic changes would be unpopular so it would have to be changed slowly over time.

Yes with 100% LRC they would only have to carry 1 of each reg! However, those regs could be looted. (this is just one idea)
ANother idea is to have a blessed reagent bag (limited carrying amount) and then limit LRC to 50 or 75%. Again forces people to consume regs, yet allows convience! (both sides win).

UO needs gold sinks more now than ever! This is certainly one way to help.