Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Enchanting - Trinkets?Follow

#1 Nov 08 2009 at 2:40 PM Rating: Default
**
402 posts
I hope that in a future patch, enchanters get more trinkets to make.

We can make the Smoking Heart of the Mountain. I'd like to see some for lvl 80 (or higher, with future expansions).
#2 Nov 08 2009 at 9:22 PM Rating: Excellent
**
422 posts
Well, at low levels enchanters could also make BoE wands, but that didn't last either. I believe the highest level wand only required level 30 to use, then they disappear from your recipes.

I get the impression Blizzard was trying some things out with the profession and the skill to craft those items was deemed unnecessary.
#3 Nov 08 2009 at 9:48 PM Rating: Decent
**
402 posts
Good point about the wands.

They should expand the wands, trinkets and enchanted mats (currently have enchanted leather and enchanted thorium).
#4 Nov 08 2009 at 11:50 PM Rating: Good
The trinket was a leftover from vanilla. Crafting of trinkets was then shifted over to the domain of JCs. They tend not to overlap stuff like that.
#5 Nov 09 2009 at 4:08 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,879 posts
I'm still kinda choked they took our oils away from us - they were pretty much the only reliable way chanters could make cash back in the day (short of selling their DE matts).

Anyone remember Blizz's reasonning for removing them?
#6 Nov 09 2009 at 8:36 AM Rating: Good
rusttle wrote:
I'm still kinda choked they took our oils away from us - they were pretty much the only reliable way chanters could make cash back in the day (short of selling their DE matts).

Anyone remember Blizz's reasonning for removing them?


Because they wanted to get rid of another aspect of min-maxing I think.
____________________________
Anobix and Brutusbukeye of <Imprimis> of US-Stormscale
Progress: TBC: Clear. WotLK: Clear -25HLK. Cata: 85 and Unsubscribed!
How to Use Rawr
#7 Nov 09 2009 at 3:26 PM Rating: Good
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,916 posts
rusttle wrote:
I'm still kinda choked they took our oils away from us - they were pretty much the only reliable way chanters could make cash back in the day (short of selling their DE matts).

Anyone remember Blizz's reasonning for removing them?


Blizzard was trying to keep as many extra variables out of adjusting raids as possible. If oils were usable all the encounters would need to be adjusted to assume all casters have extra regen or SP from them. By taking them out, encounters could be made slightly easier.
____________________________
Volunteer News Writer for the ZAM Network.
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#8 Nov 09 2009 at 5:10 PM Rating: Default
**
809 posts
My elem shammy used Figurine - Twilight Serpent for a long time. I had a number of folks ask about it then, even more so with JC gems were in it.
____________________________
"...for he suffers the worst fate he can know, and that is to know that he dies."
#9 Nov 09 2009 at 10:18 PM Rating: Default
***
3,879 posts
That's a pretty lame ass/sucky reason - by that philosophy then they should remove enchants, sharpening stones, armor patches and gems (not that I want them to - just pointing out the failure of their "reasoning").
#10 Nov 10 2009 at 12:22 AM Rating: Good
rusttle wrote:
That's a pretty lame ass/sucky reason - by that philosophy then they should remove enchants, sharpening stones, armor patches and gems (not that I want them to - just pointing out the failure of their "reasoning").


It's a perfectly valid reason. The issue with the oils was that everyone could put them on their weapons and still use flasks/elixirs. It's not like their were AP/avoidance oils, and really, the fewer consumables I need to be bringing to raids the better. Enchanters don't need anymore. They never did. They have D/Eing and enchanting all rolled into one. That can sell mats and they can sell enchants. It's good stuff.

Or, to clarify the logic, why not make it so that alchemists can sell herbal gear augments, or JCs can make consumable stat augments ala flasks? Before you know it you end up with one 18 slot bag set aside specifically for food, flasks/elixirs, potions, enchanting oils and JC consumables, and when you next upgrade a piece of gear not only do you get to fork over for the enchant/belt buckle and gems, now you get to cough up the gold/mats for your alchemy augment.

Sometimes less is more.
#11 Nov 10 2009 at 1:16 AM Rating: Good
**
546 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
rusttle wrote:
I'm still kinda choked they took our oils away from us - they were pretty much the only reliable way chanters could make cash back in the day (short of selling their DE matts).

Anyone remember Blizz's reasonning for removing them?


Blizzard was trying to keep as many extra variables out of adjusting raids as possible. If oils were usable all the encounters would need to be adjusted to assume all casters have extra regen or SP from them. By taking them out, encounters could be made slightly easier.


This was part of the reasoning, but not quite the whole story. One of the big reasons for deciding to do it had to deal with warlocks and rogues. Given that a warlocks stone or a rogues poison both occupy the temp enchant slot and thus can't use oils or sharpening stones one of two things happens. Either the class is ballanced around everyone having them and people are underpowered without them or they are balanced around no one having them and then are underpowered without them.

In essence they wanted to circumvent this balance issue by only allowing those to classes to have temp enchants on their weapons, just realised I forgot shamans so count them in too. This is also why shaman's windfury totems were changed to be a straight haste buff rather then the wonky temp enchant.
#12 Nov 10 2009 at 2:57 AM Rating: Good
Twirdman wrote:
In essence they wanted to circumvent this balance issue by only allowing those to classes to have temp enchants on their weapons, just realised I forgot shamans so count them in too. This is also why shaman's windfury totems were changed to be a straight haste buff rather then the wonky temp enchant.


Just to nit-pick for no good reason, the primary reason the Windfury Totem was changed was because enhancement shaman were always having to choose between buffing the melee with 2h weapons and buffing the 1h weapon melee dps (to include the shaman themselves). When I leveled a shaman during TBC, Windfury Weapon imbue + Grace of Air Totem was the ideal setup for me personally, and was also the preferred totem for rogues, druids, and I believe dual wielding warriors. Get a 2h wielding warrior and/or a ret pally in the group, however, and it was a different story. They always wanted the Windfury Totem. I always thought it was kind of silly that I should be required to drop a totem for a group that didn't benefit me at all, and I quickly grew tired of trying to explain to people that sacrificing a buff that helped all melee in some way (Grace of Air) for the sake of a totem that didn't benefit me at all for the sake of a buff that benefited typically one person in the group was not a smart decision. The QQ from warriors and ret pallies was bordering on unbearable at times.
#13 Nov 10 2009 at 12:08 PM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,246 posts
Aurelius wrote:
The trinket was a leftover from vanilla. Crafting of trinkets was then shifted over to the domain of JCs. They tend not to overlap stuff like that.


Not entirely true. Alchemists can make some pretty nice trinkets, too. BoP of course, but the highest level ones are pretty nice for level 75 into early 80 gearing up.
#14 Nov 11 2009 at 10:20 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,634 posts
I think that some people have addressed it, but it was my understanding that they wanted to simply remove that aspect from the ‘required to raid’ field.

If you want to raid, you are now required to have a fairly diverse group of Buffs, Food, Proper gear, proper classes (aka not 100 Melee) etc…

When making a raid I think that they assume that the group is properly maxed out. The addition of oils and stuff just made it another requirement, another bag slot, type thing. Adding the oil to a fight might now mean that the boss needed to be tuned to assume the casters had X higher spell power and thus (for example) the enrage timer would have to account for that…


Basically they were an unnecessary addition and cost. The boss still has the enrage, it just now takes 5 minutes instead of 4:30 with oil. As everyone was using oil, stones, etc – it wasn’t making it a ‘harder’ encounter – it just adjusted the timers/scale of the encounter.

I mean – if my raid does 1k DPS and your raid with oil does 2k DPS – you should get ½ the time All they did was remove that aspect from the game…


With respect to Trinkets and wands and the such - I'd hope more crafts would open up to this. A tailor trinket, a leather trinket, etc... I like more openness and less required to spec this or profession that....
____________________________
Most things you worry about never happen anyway.
#15 Nov 18 2009 at 9:29 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,057 posts
CountFenris wrote:
Well, at low levels enchanters could also make BoE wands, but that didn't last either. I believe the highest level wand only required level 30 to use, then they disappear from your recipes.


I can't remember if it was TBC or WotLK I'm thinking of, but before one of those came out, they posted a bunch of info on some really awesome craftable wands that were gonna come out. Then they removed those right before launch and I made a sad face.
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#16 Nov 18 2009 at 9:47 AM Rating: Excellent
**
422 posts
I remember that Poldaran, and it saddened me too when those epic wands were not in live.
#17 Nov 18 2009 at 10:43 AM Rating: Decent
Muggle@#%^er
Avatar
*****
19,337 posts
Though, it is worth mentioning that the few wands you can get until 30 are better than anything else I have seen in those levels, by a decent margin. I think it drops off once wands start becoming more common drops (at least from instances, since people would actually run them in vanilla).

Right now, my toon is using 2 JC trinkets, because I haven't gotten anything better. The Monarch Crab and Ruby Hare. The latter doesn't do much for me (Frost DK tank), but they both have +30 Stamina gems in them, so I'm getting 246 Stamina from them. It's hard to find a replacement for even the DpS one, as a result, because not many trinkets can make up for losing two gem slots. It would have to have a lot of Defense (letting me switch a lot of other stats to Stamina) to surpass it.

Kinda OP, letting JCs use more than one type of trinket (can't use two of the same).
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#18 Nov 18 2009 at 11:25 AM Rating: Excellent
**
422 posts
Idiggory, just FYI I have a warrior tank alt, and either of these two trinkets would be a good replacement for your Ruby Hare:

You can farm regular ToC 5-man to get The Black Heart off the Black Knight. The 126 Stamina on it beats the 122 you'd get on the JC trinket with 2 +30 stamina gems, and the proc is great for a tank.

Before ToC was released, the standard starting tank trinket was Essence of Gossamer off Hadronox in heroic AN. Not quite as much stamina as that JC trinket, but again, another nice tanking proc.

Edited, Nov 18th 2009 11:28am by CountFenris
#19 Nov 18 2009 at 6:18 PM Rating: Decent
Muggle@#%^er
Avatar
*****
19,337 posts
Thanks. :)
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 20 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (20)