Wishlist: Alchemy - Converting Gems for Gold needs a better Rate

[Saulot]

Sombre said:
The solution is simple - fire and earth gems should simply be worth more gold per gem.

+1

[Endoperez]

JimMorrison said:
Taking EA Abysia as an example, 6F gems per turn, if it were bumped to 30g apiece, that's an extra 180g/turn if they decide to alchemize at the start to get a faster start. 4 turns of that is basically an extra fort, while someone who has no access to F gems has no viable option whatsoever in that department.

Yeah, because EA Abysia is clearly a powerhouse already. Clearly we wouldn't want to overpower them. Better make Astral gems equal to the new, useful rate, because the Astral path, as we all know, is basically useless in the early game and quickly loses its appeal once you reach the end game. Perhaps one or two useful items and they're mostly cross-path, no SC buffs to speak of, and nothing else to use the gems for.


Gems to gold helps in the early game. It won't matter in middle and late, except if it helped you get there. Nations who get only or fire, only earth or some of both would benefit the most, of course. Nations such as EA/MA/LA Abysia, MA Ulm, EA/MA Agartha, MA Marignon, EA Atlantis. Most of them are considered weak. Honestly, I don't see why other gemtypes should be made equal.

[JimMorrison]

Okay you're right, sarcasm aside, I didn't put much thought into that.

I don't see any reason to have it equal other than laziness (on my part). It just irks me that you have these gems of pure crystallized magical essence, and there aren't people just crawling out of the woodwork to give you good money for them.

And no, I wasn't evaluating the worth of the gems in other game applications, I was only thinking Astral pearls would be worth better money because the essence is so pure. I see you complain about overvaluing the pearls, but you don't complain that perhaps water gems are undervalued, as I've seen numerous people state that water gems aren't as useful in the late game any others. Besides which, since pearls ARE so useful in the late game, wouldn't it stand to reason that convincing people to alchemize them for gold rather than wishing for Grigori (haha), is a good thing?

[Hoplosternum]

Saulot said:

+1

And another +1.

Even just boosting them to +20/+15 (F/E) would be a start and wouldn't affect balance much either, although I think it would have to be more than that to really make it useful. And has been pointed out most of the fire/earth nations tend not to be that strong anyway.

I assume this can't be modded but would need to be patched?

[calmon]

I think a doubled revenue is a good solution.

30 for fire and 20 for earth gems would boost the earth/fire based nations early game, feature some master alchemist pretenders and will also be a possible money make option in middle/late game combined with alchemist stone (if needed).

Its far away for being too strong and would add some nice new semi strategies.

[MaxWilson]

JimMorrison said:
I don't see any reason to have it equal other than laziness (on my part). It just irks me that you have these gems of pure crystallized magical essence, and there aren't people just crawling out of the woodwork to give you good money for them.

Alchemy is not the same as selling on the free market. Apparently the alchemical process demands fire or earth gems and nothing else.

It would be interesting if you could research more efficient alchemical processes. What if there was an F4E4 spell at Conj-9 that cost 20 Fire gems and gave you 5000 gold?

-Max

[calmon]

A bump for KO and his empty inbox

[Darkstone]

I hope this manages to be added in the next patch. It likely fulfills the requirements for patching (being in demand & easy to do).

[llamabeast]

+1

[Herode]

+50% or +100% when alchemizing the gems seems fair.
A nice idea could be : include this ratio in the game settings, along with the magic site frequency and so on.