Name-Matching Vendor Recipe Changes

With how blatantly easy it was to get an alch machine going, this was indeed a problem and needed to go away.

After this change it might still be doable inside a month race, but you'd give up a LOT. I doubt anyone will do it for a 1-week race. By the time it kicked in you'd be nearing the end and struggling to cover the shortfall you bought yourself by limiting early alter income. And there'd be no way you could afford to stash all items.

By the way, before the current 1week race, as far as I know - every race winner has had a large stash and used the helper to match alchs. If you aren't making a connection here, think it over a little longer. Alch matching makes map progression easier, and giving you access to better gear is only the tip of the iceberg. Facts are facts. Alchs were so plentiful that we could afford to spend one on every 63+ map.

This is the first race since that change, isn't it? The most organized team is stuck perpetually in level 63 maps. Last race DDT and Panda took, they didn't do anything lower than a 65 in the last two days. That's the difference between then and now, and the recipe change did it.

gh0un, calm the fuck down with this everyone is gonna pay $500-$1000 to win. I'm the one (or one of many) who told Chris to change it. I'm also one of the ones abused the fuck out of the old alch recipe able to make 30-100 alchs a day by myself with only 45 tabs. Slurm was able to make almost as many regals as I could alchs during the month race. He took 2nd ffs, he was able to hold a high position while being the richest person on the server. Maybe your 20-30 tabs are "useless" now but the recipe needed to be changed, it was extremely easy to abuse and if you followed who the richest person on the league was when the recipe was active it was always the people who were abusing the recipe. No one matched their wealth without doing it as well.

silentwolfsvx, you started down this route but didn't cover it completely. Here's what Chris said about the issue.

"

Chris wrote:

The revenue from the amount of stash tabs we have sold is a very very small amount of money, enough for only a few days of development costs. We definitely did not intend this vendor recipe to drive stash tab sales, nor do we believe it really has done so in any meaningful way. I suspect that financially it cost us more money dealing with the issues surrounding its balance than it actually generated in terms of people buying a few dozen stash tabs to try to get some advantage.

In Open Beta, each new account has four empty stash tabs. If players still want to collect rares at the new lower yield, they can certainly do so without spending any money. I personally believe that tabs are far, far more useful for traditional item storage.

So if it's pay to win, GGG is not seeing any benefit from it, also means not nearly as many people as you think are doing it gh0un.

Oh, then there's a little thing no one has bothered to mention:

"

Chris wrote:

Also, you can now buy Orbs of Alchemy from the shop in Act Three once you've completed a quest.

So, I say it again, it needed to be done because it was easily abused (adding more names doesn't matter as I know people who have worked out the best items to gather to match based on their name pool) but GGG hasn't left it so people just can't get alchs. So calm down and stop with this end of the world stuff.

"

pneuma wrote:

The Matching Name Recipe + Stash Tabs = pay2win Megathread if you missed it when it happened. This is a very good read, and should explain exactly why a change was needed.

I read that thread, but you apparently didnt read my explanation here on why the change went backwards on the issue.

And to all the others that dont seem to get my point.
The change went backwards on the issue and you still dont seem to get it.
Nothing about the new system changed anything about how you can abuse the recipe to get alch orbs once you have enough stash tabs.

It needs to go, for real. Not some copout fix that only makes it so that you need MORE stash tabs.
The concept of "complexity of recipe" vs "amount of stash you need for that recipe" is apparently too hard to grasp.

"

I'm also one of the ones abused the fuck out of the old alch recipe able to make 30-100 alchs a day by myself with only 45 tabs.

Thats the point. I did the same btw.
Anyone that can buy enough stash tabs can still abuse it the same way as before the change.
The change you suggested didnt fix anything. Use your brain for a second here instead of trying to shut me down just because i stepped on your foot.
Once you have enough stash tabs, you still have an alch machine that creates 1 alch orb per 3 rares.

Nothing you suggested fixed anything about the availability of alch orbs through that recipe.
The only thing you managed to do is to increase the amount of stash tabs one needs to actually use the recipe in a meaningful manner, which is a bad change.
It was a paytowin change, its that simple really.
Im not advocating here that everyone is gonna do it, but its possible, and if something is possible its abusable and even if it isnt abused, that still doesnt make the patch less of a paytowin patch, even if that wasnt the intention (because i can assume that their intention was the opposite)

Balancing the availability of currency through recipes is easily disconnected from the amount of stash tabs one needs to do so, and thats exactly what im asking for here.
Increasing the amount of stash tabs one needs to such huge amounts that only a crazy person with infinite money could do it, is not a proper fix to the problem, its a copout.

Do you see everyone running around with mirrors of kalandra? No you dont.
The recipe only needs a few item slots, but the complexity of the recipe makes it so that its not abusable.
As you can see the amount of stash one needs to do a recipe, and the availability of the currency that said recipe is creating, are two completely different subjects.
The rare name match recipe is a stash intensive recipe, and instead of fixing that and increasing the complexity of the recipe, you guys actually managed to botch it and went completely backwards on that one, increasing the amount of stash you need WITHOUT increasing the complexity of the recipe.

Lower the stash intensiveness, increase the complexity.
People will easily be able to enjoy the feature without having to buy stash tabs, but the complexity of the recipe will prevent the orb from overflooding the economy.

You read my posts and somehow come to the conclusion that i want an abusable recipe that makes me rich (or rather it would make anyone that uses the recipe rich and in return everyone poor again) but that just isnt the case.
You gotta work on your reading comprehension.

The name matching recipe is just flawed.
Its complexity is piss poor and the amount of stash you need to do it is hefty.
Either fix it by increasing its complexity while lowering the amount of stash you need, or remove it completely and replace it with another recipe that is rather complex while only requiring very little stash place.

First can I just say just because I have alpha under my name doesn't mean they listen that closely to my ideas. I PMed Chris saying I was able to make 100 gcps eqv in 1 week just doing the matching recipe and a couple weeks later is what they came up as a solution. I just pointed out the problem, Chris actually explained how my solutions wouldn't work (like limiting the amount of tabs someone can have)

gh0un you are severely overestimating how many people will do this. Let's go with the numbers I know.

Gold membership costs $250, which gives 83 tabs. Slurms can confirm actual numbers but when I matched with monsta or jerk they were able to pump out about 20-50 regals (not sure how jerk did his matches so he could do less but he said he had 50 at one point, monsta had like 10-20 I think) so that would be the new alch production. I think slurm and jerk matched up who both have large stashes and only made 50-150 regals (total), two people who saved up to make them as well.

How I pumped out the numbers I was doing was filling up my entire stash, making matches, vendoring whatever was left then doing it again the next day. This took 6-10 hours of MFing with 115% IIQ and 375% IIR.

Doing this daily with 100 tabs isn't possible, it would have to be more a passive thing, get some or alot of MF on a necro/totem build and do it while lvling on maps or something along those lines. So even with 2-20 times more tabs than I have with the old recipe they won't match my daily production. Yes, someone can get 1000 tabs save them up and do all the matches but unlikely because you are forgetting a big factor in this whole thing.

People with that type of money to blow generally don't want to spend hours vendoring items for alchs. I know a guy who had a bigger stash than me who at any given moment had 150 alchs ready to go, but didn't want to waste an hour or 2 vendoring them. Instead what he does is goes on jsp and just buys stuff he needs.

Ya, it's frowned upon and I think GGG will try to fight it (hope) but give me a break. You think someone who has hundreds of dollars of liquid cash is going to spend it so they can have a giant stash in order to spend hours (my largest vendor session was 150 in one sitting and it took me just over 90 minutes, that's getting 6 alchs per inventory, new recipe you get 2-4) vendoring them all? No, if they want to pay to win they are just going to buy what they want.

I was the richest person on the default server for a while and I had people offer to pay cash for orbs, items, hell I was offered $20 for my demigod. I turned it all down but there are people who aren't going to do the same as I, in fact some people reading this probably think I'm dumb but my morals are more important than cash.

It's not pay to win, it really isn't. The people looking to pay to win aren't going to pay the large sums it would take to make it possible to be pay to win, they will just go else where that actually is pay to win, spend less money and also not sink countless hours into it.

Plus the only place I can see this even remotely being pay to win is on the default (possibly HC but that type of MFing is dangerous) league which everyone already accepts will be a mess. There will be no race (under a few months long) that having 100+ tabs will passively net you a large amount of alchs.

So, while the new recipe kinda of hurts and limits the amount of alchs we can get, at least this way it's not easily abused. Also GGG has made it so you can buy alchs in act 3 so you can't really complain that they are impossible to get either.

Is that using my brain enough for you?

"

Also GGG has made it so you can buy alchs in act 3

Spoiler alert. Didnt know this, kinda cool.

Cheers.

"

JoannaDark wrote:

"

Also GGG has made it so you can buy alchs in act 3

Spoiler alert. Didnt know this, kinda cool.

Cheers.

Not a spoiler, Chris said it like a month ago. I thought he did, I already knew the information from playing act 3 but I needed to confirm so I didn't break NDA. Rather get an actual quote from Chris rather than assume wrong, spit it out and find my account locked when I wake up.

Ahh screw it. Maybe I'll check in on PoE again in the summer.

He said you could buy alchs in A3 when he announced the stash tab changed.

Missed that little tidbit as well, Heh. Nice to know.

Yeah, i bought 20-25 tabs as well before to use this recipe. I don't trade much since i play solo most of the time, So it generated alchs for me to actually craft SOME gear for myself.

I understand why its changed, I understand why ghoun doesn't like it AND i understand why it does not matter.

As long as a player can just sell his account and his items (whether GGG allows that or fights it to the death), that's the first and only option a guy looking for p2w will take. All the others aren't worth the time.

"

Moosifer wrote:

"

JoannaDark wrote:

"

Also GGG has made it so you can buy alchs in act 3

Spoiler alert. Didnt know this, kinda cool.

Cheers.

Not a spoiler, Chris said it like a month ago. I thought he did, I already knew the information from playing act 3 but I needed to confirm so I didn't break NDA. Rather get an actual quote from Chris rather than assume wrong, spit it out and find my account locked when I wake up.

Haha - all good, i genuinely did not know this. Escaped my knowledge. Seems to be a good thing though. Out of curiosity, was the fee allowed to be known? Or is that posted somewhere as well ?

Cheers.