Change stats used for the symbel

[DatOneGuy]

While at first I definitely saw the sense in this, I'm actually seeing it's really a problem of how we play, not how it works.

You should have to choose between whether you want your awesome tailor/carpenter to be able to make good stuff as well and have a Smith/Carpenter/Tailor with 75PSY each versus a Smith with 200.

PSY is hard to get, yes but that makes even more sense that more people should need it now instead of being able to feed it to a single person.

You dont seem to understand the above made points, one person with 200 is obv. better then 3 with 75, so no, its not better to feed more.

I understand those points, and that it's 'easier' to have one person do that, but unless the account is shared you're splitting one person very thin, as he would also now have to invest in the relevant stats/skill values to be as good if not better than the Carpenter/Tailor, at which point he pretty much is one.

Sure it's easier to do that, but it's a double-edged sword that you should indeed have to deal with considering you set yourself up for failure there. Cavebulbs are now 3x as necessary as they were before, that's really the main change here.

[burgingham]

The point is exactly that he does NOT have to invest in the skills to be the better carpenter or taylor, he is anyway because of his Psy (we are only talking about the Symbel here).

but that's LP that the smith could be putting in to smithing...

At a certain point you won't need to invest much into smithing anymore because that would be redundant, considering the diminishing returns of jewelry at high q.

[Potjeh]

Plus if your smithing is much higher than your psy you need dozens of points of smithing to gain just one point of jewellery quality, and since smithing is quite expensive at this level it's just not worth it.

[DatOneGuy]

Let's just say for sake of argument (obviously fake numbers):
Smith: Psy 200 Smithing 200 Carpentry 10 Dex 50
Carpenter: Psy 50 (Can easily reach not even trying by eating rats, mussels, RoB), Dex 200, Carpentry 200

Given the current (I believe...) formula which would be ³√(psy*carpentry*dex)
Smith: ³√(200*10*50) = 46
Carpenter: ³√(50*200*200* = 125.99

Given a change in the formula to weight carpentry/dex: ³√(psy*(2*carpentry)(2*dex))
Smith: ³√(200*(2*10)(2*50)) = 73
Carpenter: ³√(50*(2*200)(2*200)) = 200

If changed to favor simply Carpentry: ³√(psy*dex*(2*carpentry))
Smith: ³√(200*50*(2*10)) = 58
Carpenter: ³√(50*200*(2*200)) = 158

Whether it should be one or both I don't know. Realistically no matter what you weigh it though a Smith could easily catch up to a Carpenter at lower levels since getting 100 Carpentry is a simple task (149k LP), and getting around 100 DEX is as well given the right foods and hunger techniques while gathering that LP.

It would be much easier for the Smith to get Carpentry and DEX to 100 each while the Carpenter gets PSY to 100, however given that the food is available, the Carpenter could do it sooner and use that time to raise his Carpentry further.

Assuming they both spent time raising their 'lower' stats to 100:
Smith: ³√(200 * 100 * (2*100)) = 158
Carpenter: ³√(100 * 200 * (2*200)) = 200

The carpenter would still be ahead, but he'd get a lot more out of raising Carpentry (would alleviate at least one more stat from it's 'soft cap' status)

Take what you will from this, I just ran some numbers to check it out for myself and decided to post them.
--
Edit: I should have assumed 1 Carpentry (That he never touched it, but it's just as well with 10 really)

[sabinati]

Given a change in the formula to weight carpentry/dex: ³√(psy*(2*carpentry)(2*dex))
Smith: ³√(200*(2*10)(2*50)) = 73
Carpenter: ³√(50*(2*200)(2*200)) = 200

these would all need to be 5th root

If changed to favor simply Carpentry: ³√(psy*dex*(2*carpentry))
Smith: ³√(200*50*(2*10)) = 58
Carpenter: ³√(50*200*(2*200)) = 158

and these should be 4th root

these formulas are all based on geometric averages, not just randomly being square root or cube root.

[DatOneGuy]

Given a change in the formula to weight carpentry/dex: ³√(psy*(2*carpentry)(2*dex))
Smith: ³√(200*(2*10)(2*50)) = 73
Carpenter: ³√(50*(2*200)(2*200)) = 200

these would all need to be 5th root

If changed to favor simply Carpentry: ³√(psy*dex*(2*carpentry))
Smith: ³√(200*50*(2*10)) = 58
Carpenter: ³√(50*200*(2*200)) = 158

and these should be 4th root

these formulas are all based on geometric averages, not just randomly being square root or cube root.

I'm not too knowledgeable in this area, but when I did that they sunk so much it was crazy so I figured I was wrong and they stayed cube, but go figure. xP

In which case they would be:
Smith: 5√(200*(2*10)(2*50)) = 13
Carpenter: 5√(50*(2*200)(2*200)) = 24

Smith: 4√(200*50*(2*10)) = 21
Carpenter: 4√(50*200*(2*200)) = 44

[sabinati]

actually, my mistake, the values would be squared instead of multiplied by 2. of course this is assuming that j&l decide to apply weights in the formula and to keep with the geometric average basis for this type of formula.

[DatOneGuy]

Thus confusing the everliving shit out of me further, but for the sake of correctitude:

Smith: 5√(200*(10^2)(50^2)) = 34
Carpenter: 5√(50*(200^2)(200^2)) = 151

Smith: 4√(200*50*(10^2)) = 31
Carpenter: 4√(50*200*(200^2)) = 141

In which case either seems fair. Dex/Carpentry is a more logical option, but I just think Carpentry alone would be better