Thursday, October 29, 2009

Huge sigh of relief for enchanters!

I've been pretty /emo about the new Disenchanting in Dungeons options for 3.3
Since DE Fodder is a big source of my income, I didn't want to see it take another huge hit with the possibility of every Heroic Group DEing all their loot and sticking it on the AH.

Then I read a blue post about it that says
" To maintain the importance of the profession itself, the disenchanting UI option will only be available for groups that have a character with the necessary level of Enchanting to disenchant the items that are obtained."

FREAKING. WOOT. Thats an awesome change. Now I'm very excited about the D/E in Dungeons and the whole new PUG system sounds amazing!!


  1. just playing devils advocate, but why wouldnt they do this for skinning mobs loot option in dungeons? or heck why stop there, add mining nodes group lootable as well??

  2. Anon-

    Full blue post here kind of explains it:

    "As we mentioned in the recent post explaining the new Dungeon System, disenchanting will work a little differently in all 5 player and raid dungeons when patch 3.3 is released. We have seen a consistent pattern where players eventually need very few items from dungeons and they result to disenchanting as much of the loot as possible since those materials that can be obtained continue to have a lot of worth.

    When the new Dungeon System is launched, the default user interface will give players the option to automatically disenchant items that they obtain in 5 player and raid dungeons. This option will avoid the hassle of having items picked up by an enchanter first to redistributed later and overall will make the process much smoother.

    Also, with the inclusion of cross-realm-instancing in the dungeon system, there will be restrictions on trading items similar to the restrictions that are currently active in Battlegrounds. If the Dungeon System is used to complete a group for a dungeon then non-temporary items will not be able to be traded in the instance. This makes it so items like enchanting materials will not be able to be traded in the dungeon and using the new user interface option will be the only way to distribute disenchants. There will be some exceptions to this restriction though as Bind-on-Pickup items will continue to be trade-able to those present for the kill for a short duration and completely pre-formed groups that don’t use the Dungeon System to form the group will still allow trades.

    To maintain the importance of the profession itself, the disenchanting UI option will only be available for groups that have a character with the necessary level of Enchanting to disenchant the items that are obtained. "

    Skinning and Mining can't really be given the same excuses.

  3. Then I don't see the point of it at all. As things go atm, the blues are usually DE'd at the end then shared out fairly - if there aren't enough for everyone then all roll and the hightest rolls get a shard each. This way people will probably be bitching because x got 3 and y and z didn't get any at all.

  4. Hulan, with the cross battlegroup PUGs, you are not allowed to open trade windows, thus giving out shards wouldn't be possible.

  5. Blizzard's attempt to "maintain the importance of the profession itself" is kind of... inadequate. The auto-DE system as they're describing it is a blanket solution that takes away an Enchanter's choice to provide the services of their profession or not.

    Common practice or courtesy aside, when an item drops it still has value as a vendored item whether it's worn or not. The benefit of having leveled Enchanting is that an Enchanter has the option to enhance the value of these kinds of items by sharding them. Which really, when you get down to it, isn't always much of an enhancement. Many greens vendor for a fair amount, even if an Abyss Crystal will usually sell for more than an epic will vendor for.

    Which makes me wonder; why would Blizzard try to fix what wasn't really broken? Surely there is a more specific workaround to their inability or unwillingness to implement trading of static items between members of a cross-server group. On many servers groups roll Need on all green items anyway. It's easy enough to find an Enchanter to dust your greens for you. And if they're able to tag BoP items in such a way as to make them viable for trading within the group, is it such a stretch to work out a way to shard dropped items manually for players from another server while still in that group or dungeon? (Think the same way Enchanters currently put enchants on items via the Will Not Be Traded box.)

    The point that truly rankles is the precedent Blizzard is setting. A service granted by any profession - something that takes individual effort to level, presumably for personal gain - should not be made readily available to anyone but the player at that player's own discretion.

    It's unfortunate that Blizzard went with the angle that would please the masses of players who feel entitled to an enchanter's services because it's "just pushing a button" rather than a more elegant solution that would work for everyone.

  6. Agree w/ Anon above. This change takes the choice to DE away from the enchanter. For example, I always offer to DE stuff for good pugs w/ chill, skilled players, but not for pugs with bitchy assholes or people we succeeded in spite of instead of because of. Now even the jerks get the benefit of my profession even if I don't want to offer it.

    A better solution would have been to allow a modified trade window b/t players in the pug from different realms, where every slot is 'Not-Tradeable', only DE-able. A player just has to open it w/ the Enchanter, and the Enchanter just has to click DE on the items in the slots, and the items are replaced in the initiating player's bags w/ the DE mats. Similar to how lockpicking currently works, but w/ a bulk option instead of one at a time.

    This way would streamline enchanting, make cross-realm pug enchanting viable and quick, while still leaving the choice to DE to the enchanter.

  7. If you don't want to DE then don't click the DE option.

    The "relief" is that Blizzard's plan before was to have a DE option in place irregardless if there was an enchanter in the party or not. So you tell me whats better?

  8. Same Anon here from the post just above Kurtosis.

    Not clicking the DE option only keeps the item unsharded if you win the roll. An enchanter's service is still being used without consent should anyone else choose the option and win the roll without having Enchanting themselves.

    Making a bad thing slightly less bad does not by default make it good. I apologize if I haven't given enough recognition to the OP's very valid relief that things aren't as bad as they first would have been, but the core problem of the auto-DE system remains unaddressed by Blizzard.

    Leveling a profession entitles ONE player to the benefits of that profession. This one player is the player who leveled that profession.

    If Blizzard is dissatisfied with this view on professions where concerns the ability to Disenchant, then perhaps they should change the ability or unyoke it from Enchanting altogether.

    Well, not really. That would suck. But it bears mentioning in light of their decision or inability to find a different workaround for something that... really isn't a necessary facet of dungeon running to begin with.

    Please, Blizzard. We've wanted the ability to disenchant others' soulbound items for ages anyway. If had it, then there would be no need for the auto-DE system at all. It's difficult to believe that this solution, the DE by Will Not Be Traded window solution, or the few others I've seen bandied about are impossible or even terribly difficult to achieve.

    I'm glad you're relieved, Tella. I share your excitement over the new LFG system in general. But I'm surprised you're so okay with the auto-DE system as it's currently described and maybe I'm not the only one.

  9. First of all, addressing Blizzard in my blog is pointless. I seriously doubt any one of their staff reads this blog. If you have something to say to them, you should post it on the official forums.

    In my own personal opinion, I LIKE the DE change. I think it's a fucking hassle to have to trade each of the group members and D/E their shit. It takes my time that I much rather spend doing something else. I leveled my profession to help myself, and to help others. I'm not some greedy bitch who wants to keep it all to myself. In the long run, it does not HURT you to let them use your D/E option. However, wasting my fucking time with 5 trades DOES hurt me. Time is money, and anything that takes hassle out of something that I dislike doing is great in my book.

    You just like I am, are of course entitled to your own opinion and thank you for sharing it here, but again if you honestly have an issue with game mechanics or future ones, my blog is not the place.

  10. I leveled enchant (twice) because it was/is insanely useful for myself. However, you should be able to actually get a profit out of it. In a ideal world, we could actually go out and farm instances for dream shards and abyss crystals, to make high end enchants that we can sell on the AH.

    But no. For one, getting a group to allow you take shards is very difficult, even if you need nothing in the place and are just helping out. (and honestly I'm not sure this is even ethical, but the point remains as always we cant go out and collect decent amounts of our crafting materials.

    For another, at least on my server, the idiots sell the scrolls for less than the enchanting mats. For example an enchant (agi to cloak) which uses 6? infinite dust routinely sells for 10g when ID costs 3.5g. From my own observations only half of the scrolls are profitable and the competition is fierce. Whereas with JC or inscription I can make between 500-1000g a day.

    Anyway I really am looking forward to the LFG system but I think this idea is just horrible, we should absolutely not be giving away enchanting materials for free.

  11. Hey again, Tella. You posted your opinion about game mechanics on a public blog. You invite discussion about your posts with a comment box. Isn't it a little contradictory to say your blog is not the place for such discussion given these points?

    I apologize if I've offended you or overstepped some sort of boundary by taking the time to read and think about what's been posted then give back a bit of actual input. I thought a more detailed, thoughtful reply would be more welcome than the "omg my market is ruined!" spam all over the web on this topic. Instead, I get the distinct impression that you've received my difference of opinion in the same way as any random forum troll would: by calling greed, decrying the very merit of my opinion, and (politely, I must admit) telling me I can GTFO should I not like it.

    And of course, having folks GTFO is your call. You are absolutely free to excise any commented content you feel is objectionable. But you didn't. You chose to belittle instead. Given the medium, it's disappointing.

  12. Anon -

    While you were picking through my words, I'm surprised you didn't realize that I was referring to you "addressing blizzard". You know, that paragraph where you said

    "Please, Blizzard. We've wanted the ability to disenchant others' soulbound items for ages anyway. " etc?

    I said that ^ is not what my blog is for, and if you really had a problem with a game mechanic, you should take that paragraph to the blizzard forums.

    Another thing you may have missed, is I thanked you for sharing your opinion here.
    Very troll like indeed.

    Honestly, If I really had such a huge problem with your comments, which I don't, I would have clicked the delete button.

  13. Addressing Blizzard, or anyone, rhetorically in conversation is hardly an uncommon occurrence. The same goes for easing a rebuke with gratitude. It's a little like saying, "E for effort!"

    As to missing things, maybe we can both agree that the burden of communication is on the author. I might have chosen a cleaner way to state my ideas in the beginning.

    Kudos to you for seeing it through, tone or motive notwithstanding. I have to confess, it's not often I stop lurking anywhere to say anything. One of the reasons I subscribe to your blog is because your posts are always feisty and as such I have a hard time being butthurt enough to stop reading. >.>

    (TL;DR - Thanks for putting up with uppity readers. Please keep it up.)

  14. Anon -

    Yeah.. I think you just became my favorite reader. I gotta tip my hat to you, It takes big-shit balls to say what you just did.

    No really, that meant a lot to me. I know what its like to lurk and never post.. It's way to easy to sit on the sidelines, thank you for saying something. You really should more often, you have a strong opinion and write very well. I actually enjoyed our *cough* discussion *cough*! I kept refreshing this post looking for a reply ;D