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

[Endoperez]

ano said:
I meant alchemizing fire and earth for gold.
That's the thread topic, isn't it?

I meant that for Edratman. "I never seem to have a mage that can covert [water] gems to gold" etc. It also doesn't hurt if any new people here know about alchemy, even if they haven't read page 91 of the manual.

[MakeYourTime]

I agree with raising the exchange rates on alchemy. Since Dom 2 money has simply become worth a lot less (just like in real life *sigh*). With armies becoming larger in general, you simply need much more gold to be competitive in the troop department, so it stands to reason that alchemical transmutation should be adjusted accordingly. It doesn't really make sense to have a feature that's basically useless because it wasn't updated along with everything else (I'm sure as hell not going to waste up to 4 gems of anything for 15 gold...) There's the matter of building prices, but that could be adjusted accordingly, if people think that's even an issue.

[JimMorrison]

As well as increasing value of Fire and Earth, I think all gems should be transmutable for coin. Maybe for less than those 2 gems, but if it is made strategically viable, then it would kind of suck that only a few nations have starting gem income to make it possible in the early game where some would argue it was most useful. 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.

Actually, I'd probably say making F worth 30, S and E worth 25, and all others worth 20..... Would probably be a fair enough balance. Or you could say F/S/E 30, and all else 25, I don't care.

Though have to be careful, if you make it worthy for everyone, the 50% bonus could end up too powerful.

[Coldshard]

What if whenever a fire or earth gem was alchemized it gave some amount of gold and had a chance of giving you one of the other gems?

At that point the boost to alchemy could be split between the two options somehow which would mean that the increase in gold wouldnt multiply as heavily for them. Also, the alchemists stone could be made to be worthwhile!

[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?

[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