Item stacking "fix"

[Joanna]

Similar thread was made already but let's kill 2 birds with one stone:

Let's make operational stacking (moving , selling , crafting and processing) the way it is =105 and "excess" maximum allowable stack to 210.

Why ?

First off it would fix silks/potions double stack issue.

Another thing it's fairness to those who leveled stacking all the way up.

We all know with as low as 50 in item stacking a stack of 105 can be created and used for crafting/processing which makes it very unfair for people with item stacking at 100. The only difference is ability to move whole stack around which is not an issue as items could be placed into storage and would be "top off" after let's say downtiering.

Not to mention there is few other ways to do it


Having "passive/excess" stacking capped at 210 seems like a bold move but it will do more good than bad

A simple solution that would fix existing issues and makes it fair for those with high item stacking.

I'll gladly hear better idea ...

[Enduir]

Originally Posted by Joanna

I'll gladly hear better idea ...

Forum ban for your good self?

[Joanna]

Originally Posted by Enduir

Forum ban for your good self?

Eh ? Did you just plarp in my post ?

[Brick]

Originally Posted by Joanna

Why don't reward not only people who find exploits but also those who coming up with good ideas ?

Originally Posted by Enduir

Forum ban for your good self?

I think you are deserving of a reward

[Baewi]

Plarps

[Tip]

Who says the size of the stack is the issue with double stacks?

Fairness of those who leveled item stacking is that they got what they knew they were going to get as the skill states....

If it would do more good than bad.. what are the bads it will cause? There are always bads.

[danielrox]

lulz

[Baewi]

Buff me please I dun wanna work for anything!

[Soxson]

Originally Posted by Baewi

Buff me please I dun wanna work for anything!

Omg can I have a buff too?

[Joanna]

I think you all just crawled from under a rock...

Silk drops are not fixed and double stack on 102 is 105 .... same goes for potions

[Blaze]

honestly this thread is a bit tl;dr for me. idc if it gets implemented or not. I decided to read it randomly today since no other threads were touched..

All the comments insult joanna mostly... but has anyone actually pointed out a single 'bad' point of the idea? Whether the idea is bad or not out of 7 comments not 1 person can offer even a slight bit of constructive criticism or say why they dislike the idea? :{ Idiots. If you find something bad explain why so the other party can actually maybe see some flaws in it to understand. Don't just be an ass say 'This is bad, you're an idiot kthxbai'.

Same for if it's an ok idea but you don't 100% agree. Write your opinion so maybe the OP will see a different perspective and change the idea.

[Joanna]

Originally Posted by Blaze

honestly this thread is a bit tl;dr for me. idc if it gets implemented or not. I decided to read it randomly today since no other threads were touched..

All the comments insult joanna mostly... but has anyone actually pointed out a single 'bad' point of the idea? Whether the idea is bad or not out of 7 comments not 1 person can offer even a slight bit of constructive criticism or say why they dislike the idea? :{ Idiots. If you find something bad explain why so the other party can actually maybe see some flaws in it to understand. Don't just be an ass say 'This is bad, you're an idiot kthxbai'.

Same for if it's an ok idea but you don't 100% agree. Write your opinion so maybe the OP will see a different perspective and change the idea.

Was about to say that . Thanks Blaze , you the man !

[Brick]

I don't see why you want this implemented... outside of the stacking of potions from combat (which Glitch has already stated will be fixed, if it hasn't already), all this would functionally change is the way in which downtiering works. Honestly, it just seems a very unnecessary addition, that acts as a very minor QOL improvement/time save for people with 50+ item stacking. With craft memory, it's already extremely easy anyway, hence the general apathetic response.

At least you're not asking for more s2 buffs, and I hope a srs response makes you super excited.

[Blaze]

Originally Posted by Brick

I don't see why you want this implemented... outside of the stacking of potions from combat (which Glitch has already stated will be fixed, if it hasn't already), all this would functionally change is the way in which downtiering works. Honestly, it just seems a very unnecessary addition, that acts as a very minor QOL improvement/time save for people with 50+ item stacking. With craft memory, it's already extremely easy anyway, hence the general apathetic response.

At least you're not asking for more s2 buffs, and I hope a srs response makes you super excited.

yay. :{ an actual response.

[Baewi]

To be fair, Joanna suggests a lot of things...
Do any of them not get trolled?

[Tip]

Thanks Brickk.
Kind of what I was seeking was more content to even respond to... hence the questions. I would rather Glitch work on the double stack issue and other already planned items than spend the time on this which is holds such little value.

[Enduir]

Feedback? Sure, I can try that.

Other than fixing the doublestack issue which realistically must be a pretty rare occurrence (combination of right hotzone/decent tier of resource/stack over 52) and is already being worked on, there's nothing in the original suggestion that justifies the change to me.

If decumberance and stack sizes were so out of whack that larger sizes were needed to carry stuff around, I could see this as an option. If storage was so tight that no-one had space and bigger stacks were needed, maybe this change could be defended. But not the way things are.

"it's fairness to those who leveled stacking all the way up"? No, fair is letting them stack to 105 which is why they leveled the skill. Allowing another 100 skills worth of stack size for no extra effort (even with restrictions) isn't asking for fairness. Fair would be fixing the stacking exploit.