the cost increase for upgrading weapon and armor anchantments form perfect->pure and from pure->transcendant seems to be to brutal imo.
This I can agree with. If the cost of SMoPs isn't coming down, there is no savings here because you never needed a matching enchant to start with.
So this is a harsh increase in the cost of higher rank enchants which were once fairly manageable after you got over the hump of needing the matching items.
10x Superior Potency + 3x Greater Enchantment Stones
Pure->Transcendent
1%
50000
15x Superior Potency + 6x Greater Enchantment Stones
Transcendent->Unparalleled
1%
55000
10x Ultimate Potency + 3x Superior Enchantment Stones
Wait, Are not that all the marks requirements at all levels refining a lot more expensive than right now? Whats going on?
The RP required has been adjusted and more importantly, the takes two to upgrade tiers have been removed. Which removes 11 coalescent wards from the equation of leveling a shard up to transcendent. We increased the reagent cost to go along with that big reduction and overall it is less costly than it was before due to the duplicate requirements being removed.
the coalescent wards from shards->lesser (8-1 =7) and from lesser-> average(4-1=3), so 10 out of your 11, if my maths aren´t off, stopped being relevant for most weapon and armor enchantments the moment said enchantment on average quality was added as a lockbox drop. So you´ve reduced the costs at an irrelevant low end, and added it at the relevant top.
I think the math on dual/tri stat enchants might be off.
Previously a dual stat enchant gave like 20% bonus to stat total compared to a single stat enchant. They now only give a 15% bonus over a single stat enchant.
Previously a tri stat enchant gave a wonky 31.43% bonus to stat total compared to a single stat enchant, They now give a 40% increase in total stats compared to a single stat enchant.
I can understand buffing the tri stat enchants, since they were often hard to use in most builds, but what is the logic behind nerfing dual stat enchants?
2x Superior Potency + 3x Greater Enchantment Stones
12->13
3%
55000
Ultimate Potency
13->14
1%
60000
2x Ultimate Potency + 3x Superior Enchantment Stones
Armor/Weapon Enhancement Ranks:
Rank
Chance Success
RP Required
Materials
Shard->Lesser
1%
0
9 Identical Shards
Lesser->Average
1%
5000
5x Greater Potency
Average->Greater
1%
15000
10x Greater Potency + 3x Enchatment Stones
Greater->Perfect
1%
30000
15x Greater Potency + 6x Enchantment Stones
Perfect->Pure
1%
40000
10x Superior Potency + 3x Greater Enchantment Stones
Pure->Transcendent
1%
50000
15x Superior Potency + 6x Greater Enchantment Stones
Transcendent->Unparalleled
1%
55000
10x Ultimate Potency + 3x Superior Enchantment Stones
so am i correct in saying, or talking/typing , that in order to level up your enchantements with the new mod you now require a buttload more greater marks of potency along with the same lvl enchantement x 3 to get it to go to the next level..
Example how I see this is; " Lightning Enchantment Rank 9 + 2 Greater marks of Potency + 3 Lightning enchantments rank 9 = 1 Rank 10 Lightning?" " Lightning Enchantment rank 12 + 15 Superior Marks of Potency + "6" Rank 12 Lightning Enchantment's = 1 Rank 13 Lightning Enchantment?" " Lightning Enchantment rank 13 + 10 Ultimate Potency + 3 Rank 13 Lightning Enchantments = 1 Rank 14 Lightning Enchantment?"
OR is the Prior Post about the Union Stability and Power of all ranks from green ( lesser ) to Purple ( Greater ) are these stones put in place... by making them all the same Name for each rank .. lesser enchantment , Enchantment , Greater Enchantment , and Superior Enchantment..???
example how I see this is; " Lightning Enchantment Rank 9 + 2 Greater marks of Potency + 3 Formally Known Stones called "Mark Of Power, Mark of Stability , Mark of Union " Now called "Enchantment Stones"= 1 Rank 10 Lightning?"
How does this system affect artifact weapons (main / off) and armor (neck / belt)? What stones will be required to upgrade?
Artifact Equipment has had the progression RP cut in half, the reagents are still the same it is just that Marks of Power/Stability/Union have been changed to all be the same thing which is called Enchanting Stones.
0
Options
beckylunaticMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 14,231Arc User
"Enchantment Stone" will replace Marks of Power, Union, and Stability.
so am i correct in saying, or talking/typing , that in order to level up your enchantements with the new mod you now require a buttload more greater marks of potency along with the same lvl enchantement x 3 to get it to go to the next level..
Example how I see this is; " Lightning Enchantment Rank 9 + 2 Greater marks of Potency + 3 Lightning enchantments rank 9 = 1 Rank 10 Lightning?" " Lightning Enchantment rank 12 + 15 Superior Marks of Potency + "6" Rank 12 Lightning Enchantment's = 1 Rank 13 Lightning Enchantment?" " Lightning Enchantment rank 13 + 10 Ultimate Potency + 3 Rank 13 Lightning Enchantments = 1 Rank 14 Lightning Enchantment?"
IS That What I Am SEEING!!??!!??
If so im out... that's plan out B.S.
Nope! Relax "Enchantment Stones" are not additional copies of the same enchantment. That requirement has been completely removed for all enchantment ranks.
As part of the effort to reduce needless inventory clutter, they have eliminated Marks of Stability, Union, and Power, and replaced those marks with "Enchantment Stones"
Why are empowered runestones giving 32k HP in defense slots? Isn't that more than the normal ratio for HP, and can still transfer to the player through augments?
And let me guess - enchantment stones come in BtC, BtA and unbound? When do Coal wards, superior marks and these new stupendous marks start dropping out of ... say.... MSPC?
Founding Member of "Wrong Side of the Stronghold" Ravenskya - TR / Krisha Chaos - OP / Waffles - GF / Dex Domitor - HR Becky the trendy GWF - GWF / Too Toasty - SW / Falcor - DC / Morrigan - CW / Sir Didymus - OP
0
Options
beckylunaticMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 14,231Arc User
Why are empowered runestones giving 32k HP in defense slots? Isn't that more than the normal ratio for HP, and can still transfer to the player through augments?
There's a post in here to the effect that they're trying to do this to boost companion survivability, but that's not what players will use them for.
Better to actually put the hitpoints into summonable companion stats, which makes them somewhat accessible to transfer to players, but less likely to become the next nerf.
@noworries#8859 Can you please provide the estimated cost of an Ultimate Mark of Power? I realize that this variable may still be in flux, but a ballpark estimate would be helpful in trying to wrap my head around the changes. Is it 2x a SMoP? 5x? 10x?
Why are we using 10x Greater Potency instead of 2 GMoPs and 2 SMoPs, which has an equal base Wondrous Bazaar cost? Why are we using 15x Greater Potency instead of 3 GMoPs and 3 SMoPs, which has an equal base Wondrous Bazaar cost? Same questions with the 10 and 15 SMoP combinations, instead of lower numbers of UMoPs. This goes back to inventory management concerns, but is largely not really a big deal either direction.
I posted this in the Bonding Stone thread as well, but I have three concerns about possibly unintended ramification of these changes.
The first is that replacing the cost of a second enchantment with Marks of Potency does not correctly map to the relative cost of certain under-appreciated weapon/armor enchants. The Lifedrinker Enchantment, for instance, is both much-maligned and recently dropped from Lockboxes, so was waaaaaaaay less expensive to upgrade (or purchase) across all ranks than the new MoP costs. Current Lockboxes have historically drastically reduced the cost of the currently-dropping R8 enchantment. That won't change, but it may not ripple as far up beyond R8s anymore, since each player who wants one will only need one, and the cost of future ranks will in no way be a multiple of the cost of the R8.
The second is related to both others, and is that Marks of Potency are almost entirely isolated from market fluctuations of any kind. Wondrous Bazaar event coupons exist, as do Wondrous Bazaar sales, but they are quite rare (and don't stack), so the cheapest way to obtain these marks is to hoard AD in preparation of one of these events and then stockpile en-masse. Between events, the cheapest way to obtain these marks is the AH, from people who stockpiled en-masse and are selling off some of their hoard with a profit margin attached -- but they will never be cheaper than the Bazaar-Coupon/Sale, and never more expensive than the Bazaar. This market being largely static isn't necessarily a problem, but when making changes that affect a large portion of the economy, it's worth keeping in mind.
The third is that, while purchasing a second enchantment at an equal rank is an expensive prospect, the bulk of that money goes to another player, and remains in the economy. Shifting that cost into Marks of Potency, in contrast, removes all of that AD from circulation, because almost all Marks of Potency are ultimately sourced from the Wondrous Bazaar. Most large-scale currency Sinks in MMOs are for entirely optional items, like a cool looking mount or transmute. There's nothing inherently wrong with large-scale AD sinks for required items, but I want to make sure that this is being done intentionally, and not just accidentally as a side effect of looking for an easy way to maintain rough cost parity while removing duplicate enchantments.
Why are empowered runestones giving 32k HP in defense slots? Isn't that more than the normal ratio for HP, and can still transfer to the player through augments?
There's a post in here to the effect that they're trying to do this to boost companion survivability, but that's not what players will use them for.
Better to actually put the hitpoints into summonable companion stats, which makes them somewhat accessible to transfer to players, but less likely to become the next nerf.
I thought companion HP *never* transferred to players? Not even from Augments?
Well you all need to fix the % rate on wards using 20 30 and even 40 ward on a 20% chance is flat out robbery , I've encountered on last dbe RP 67 wards on a 10% chance , rediculous , explain the math to me ? Seriously , a TRANS enchant sayy lightening cost a player 4 to 5 million AD ... whats thatt approx. $160.00 for 1 item , your talking over $1,800 to $2,500 + for an end game character ... and you can't make wards work ? 10% = 1 in 10 chance ... I just feel your not as concerned about your gamers as you are the money you have spilling in ... if your putting up odds you should at least get them right .
@noworries#8859 Can you please provide the estimated cost of an Ultimate Mark of Power? I realize that this variable may still be in flux, but a ballpark estimate would be helpful in trying to wrap my head around the changes. Is it 2x a SMoP? 5x? 10x?
@noworries#8859 Can you please provide the estimated cost of an Ultimate Mark of Power? I realize that this variable may still be in flux, but a ballpark estimate would be helpful in trying to wrap my head around the changes. Is it 2x a SMoP? 5x? 10x?
125k AD for a UMoP
I assume that's the wondrous bazaar cost? So 93,750 for a VIP 12?
10 superior for PURE , 15 superior marks at 75,000 to 100,000 AD apc. for a TRANS PLUS A COAL WARDs , you tripled the cost , and thats not the final rank ... ? WOW ! What the new cost on Enchants like RADS , AZURES etc ... ? IDK , how exactly is this helping make the game easier ? In 18 mo. AD exchange has TRIPLED . no need for a reply this is incredible to say the least.
Well you all need to fix the % rate on wards using 20 30 and even 40 ward on a 20% chance is flat out robbery , I've encountered on last dbe RP 67 wards on a 10% chance , rediculous , explain the math to me ? Seriously , a TRANS enchant sayy lightening cost a player 4 to 5 million AD ... whats thatt approx. $160.00 for 1 item , your talking over $1,800 to $2,500 + for an end game character ... and you can't make wards work ? 10% = 1 in 10 chance ... I just feel your not as concerned about your gamers as you are the money you have spilling in ... if your putting up odds you should at least get them right .
Failing 20 times in a row on a 20% chance is a 1.15% chance - put another way, of every 100 people attempting that 20% chance? 1 of them SHOULD fail 20 times in a row.
Failing 40 times in a row on a 20% chance is about a 1 in 7500 chance. One out of every 7500 players SHOULD fail 40 times in a row.
Failing 67 times in a row on a 10% chance, by contrast, is only about a 1/1100 chance. Another way of putting that is, out of every 1100 players, one of them was you.
The odds work just fine.
Although I would certainly prefer an STO-style upgrade system, where every failed upgrade adds to the chance of the next attempt. So if you fail a 1%, the next chance is 2%, then 3%, etc, up until you finally get the success and the chance of the NEXT upgrade resets to zero. STO upgrades start at much lower percentages than NW upgrades, though: You'll NEVER see even a 50% chance of upgrade on a first attempt. I think the highest possible upgrade chance is from a 1/year event "RP" item + a lockbox-drop upgrade booster on a Mark II Rare (lowest possible IL) item, and that will come in at about 40%.
(and the item will be Mark VII *and* Legendary when the upgrade finishes, unless you're super-unlucky, so you just need to pump in more RP to get it up to max Mark level and you're good. But, again, it's a different system.)
So 1.25x SMoP? Why not just use 1x SMoP + 1xGMoP instead? Just inventory management?
Why does this awkwardly make R12-R13 enchantments (1 UMoP) 75k and 3 greater enchantment stones less expensive than R11-R12 (2 SMoPs, 3 Greater enchantment stones)
And again, why use 10x GMoP for R8-R9 Weapon/Armor Enchants instead of (2x GMoP + 2x SMoP) or 2x UMoP? Why use 15x GMoP for R9-R10 instead of (3x GMoP + 3x SMoP) or 3x UMoP? Why 10 SMoPs instead of 8 UMoPs? Why 15 SMoPs instead of 12 UMoPs?
I mean, it doesn't really matter as these all have the same AD cost from the bazaar, but smaller numbers often look less daunting.
Even more reliance on Preservation and Coalescent wards... wonderful.
Needing a second enchantment/enhancement to go up a tier is no longer a thing. That alone significantly reduces the number of coalescent wards it takes to level up a weapon/armor Enhancement. The percentage chance of success of enchantments and runestones was improved as well, meaning fewer preservation wards needed.
You got rid of some of the 25 and 20% chances, but added more 3 and 1% chances - tell me HOW exactly that means less wards will be needed?
Those are new ranks.
Currently on live the percentage chances are: 95, 90, 85, 60, 40, 30, 25, 20, 10, 5, 3
The new percentages are: 100, 90, 80, 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, 10, 5
Then there are two new ranks which are 3 and 1.
On top of that, ranks 7, 8 and 9 no longer need a second rank 7, 8 and 9. Which takes out all of the ranking up of second gems over and over (which required their own preservation wards to rank up).
Even more reliance on Preservation and Coalescent wards... wonderful.
Needing a second enchantment/enhancement to go up a tier is no longer a thing. That alone significantly reduces the number of coalescent wards it takes to level up a weapon/armor Enhancement. The percentage chance of success of enchantments and runestones was improved as well, meaning fewer preservation wards needed.
Currently for 12lvl from 7 you need ~90 preservation wards. With new system -> 75 + 1 coalescent ward.
@noworries#8859 Can you please provide the estimated cost of an Ultimate Mark of Power? I realize that this variable may still be in flux, but a ballpark estimate would be helpful in trying to wrap my head around the changes. Is it 2x a SMoP? 5x? 10x?
125k AD for a UMoP
Hi @noworries#8859 , where will we get Superior Enchantment Stones? Wonderous bazaar too?
Even more reliance on Preservation and Coalescent wards... wonderful.
Needing a second enchantment/enhancement to go up a tier is no longer a thing. That alone significantly reduces the number of coalescent wards it takes to level up a weapon/armor Enhancement. The percentage chance of success of enchantments and runestones was improved as well, meaning fewer preservation wards needed.
You got rid of some of the 25 and 20% chances, but added more 3 and 1% chances - tell me HOW exactly that means less wards will be needed?
Those are new ranks.
Currently on live the percentage chances are: 95, 90, 85, 60, 40, 30, 25, 20, 10, 5, 3
The new percentages are: 100, 90, 80, 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, 10, 5
Then there are two new ranks which are 3 and 1.
On top of that, ranks 7, 8 and 9 no longer need a second rank 7, 8 and 9. Which takes out all of the ranking up of second gems over and over (which required their own preservation wards to rank up).
Even more reliance on Preservation and Coalescent wards... wonderful.
Needing a second enchantment/enhancement to go up a tier is no longer a thing. That alone significantly reduces the number of coalescent wards it takes to level up a weapon/armor Enhancement. The percentage chance of success of enchantments and runestones was improved as well, meaning fewer preservation wards needed.
Currently for 12lvl from 7 you need ~90 preservation wards. With new system -> 75 + 1 coalescent ward.
So we need more no less.
I see ~29 needed to go from 1 to 12. And a total of ~63 to get to rank 13. And then a coalescent ward to get to 14.
It is much easier to get to rank 12 now.
2
Options
beckylunaticMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 14,231Arc User
Why are empowered runestones giving 32k HP in defense slots? Isn't that more than the normal ratio for HP, and can still transfer to the player through augments?
There's a post in here to the effect that they're trying to do this to boost companion survivability, but that's not what players will use them for.
Better to actually put the hitpoints into summonable companion stats, which makes them somewhat accessible to transfer to players, but less likely to become the next nerf.
I thought companion HP *never* transferred to players? Not even from Augments?
It does from augments and legendary bonus. I'm not sure about HP interactions with Eldritch.
A very long time ago, augments couldn't transfer HPs, but that was changed.
Wait a second. "Shard->Lesser 1% 0 9 Identical Shards"
*9*? It's going to take *9* shards to attempt to make a Lesser now? Are we at least going to be able to stack shards higher than 20?
Higher shard stacking would be nice. On the other hand, with overall storage demands poised to go down, this might be less of an issue.
I bristled at this increase at first, but then considered that those 9 shards can ultimately turn into the highest rank enchant. Then my reaction was more considering the feasibility of making many, many Elven Battle enchants. Which I would not have done when looking at a need for 16 shards, but more importantly, 4 coal wards. Though this is most beneficial to enchants that never got cheap from lockboxes.
How will the special refinement stones for Artifact Weapons convert? The ones that may be 5000 for non artifact weapons and 50000 for artifact?
Reducing the cost by 1/2 on Artifact weapons doesn't make up for all the RP I will lose on these. I have been saving the special stones but wont have my artifact weapons ready in time I think.....
Comments
So this is a harsh increase in the cost of higher rank enchants which were once fairly manageable after you got over the hump of needing the matching items.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter#/discussion/1234037/official-feedback-thread-bonding-runestone-changes/p10
Summary, 100% uptime with changes in percentages provided. Eldritch to provide stat bonus in both offensive and defensive slots to allow more augment companion selection. IMHO, both are welcomed developments.
Previously a dual stat enchant gave like 20% bonus to stat total compared to a single stat enchant. They now only give a 15% bonus over a single stat enchant.
Previously a tri stat enchant gave a wonky 31.43% bonus to stat total compared to a single stat enchant, They now give a 40% increase in total stats compared to a single stat enchant.
I can understand buffing the tri stat enchants, since they were often hard to use in most builds, but what is the logic behind nerfing dual stat enchants?
Signature [WIP] - tyvm John
Example how I see this is;
" Lightning Enchantment Rank 9 + 2 Greater marks of Potency + 3 Lightning enchantments rank 9 = 1 Rank 10 Lightning?"
" Lightning Enchantment rank 12 + 15 Superior Marks of Potency + "6" Rank 12 Lightning Enchantment's = 1 Rank 13 Lightning Enchantment?"
" Lightning Enchantment rank 13 + 10 Ultimate Potency + 3 Rank 13 Lightning Enchantments = 1 Rank 14 Lightning Enchantment?"
OR is the Prior Post about the Union Stability and Power of all ranks from green ( lesser ) to Purple ( Greater ) are these stones put in place... by making them all the same Name for each rank .. lesser enchantment , Enchantment , Greater Enchantment , and Superior Enchantment..???
example how I see this is;
" Lightning Enchantment Rank 9 + 2 Greater marks of Potency + 3 Formally Known Stones called "Mark Of Power, Mark of Stability , Mark of Union " Now called "Enchantment Stones"= 1 Rank 10 Lightning?"
This is from me reading this next post here ;
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
As part of the effort to reduce needless inventory clutter, they have eliminated Marks of Stability, Union, and Power, and replaced those marks with "Enchantment Stones"
Signature [WIP] - tyvm John
Ravenskya - TR / Krisha Chaos - OP / Waffles - GF / Dex Domitor - HR
Becky the trendy GWF - GWF / Too Toasty - SW / Falcor - DC / Morrigan - CW / Sir Didymus - OP
Better to actually put the hitpoints into summonable companion stats, which makes them somewhat accessible to transfer to players, but less likely to become the next nerf.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
Why are we using 10x Greater Potency instead of 2 GMoPs and 2 SMoPs, which has an equal base Wondrous Bazaar cost?
Why are we using 15x Greater Potency instead of 3 GMoPs and 3 SMoPs, which has an equal base Wondrous Bazaar cost?
Same questions with the 10 and 15 SMoP combinations, instead of lower numbers of UMoPs. This goes back to inventory management concerns, but is largely not really a big deal either direction.
I posted this in the Bonding Stone thread as well, but I have three concerns about possibly unintended ramification of these changes.
The first is that replacing the cost of a second enchantment with Marks of Potency does not correctly map to the relative cost of certain under-appreciated weapon/armor enchants. The Lifedrinker Enchantment, for instance, is both much-maligned and recently dropped from Lockboxes, so was waaaaaaaay less expensive to upgrade (or purchase) across all ranks than the new MoP costs. Current Lockboxes have historically drastically reduced the cost of the currently-dropping R8 enchantment. That won't change, but it may not ripple as far up beyond R8s anymore, since each player who wants one will only need one, and the cost of future ranks will in no way be a multiple of the cost of the R8.
The second is related to both others, and is that Marks of Potency are almost entirely isolated from market fluctuations of any kind. Wondrous Bazaar event coupons exist, as do Wondrous Bazaar sales, but they are quite rare (and don't stack), so the cheapest way to obtain these marks is to hoard AD in preparation of one of these events and then stockpile en-masse. Between events, the cheapest way to obtain these marks is the AH, from people who stockpiled en-masse and are selling off some of their hoard with a profit margin attached -- but they will never be cheaper than the Bazaar-Coupon/Sale, and never more expensive than the Bazaar. This market being largely static isn't necessarily a problem, but when making changes that affect a large portion of the economy, it's worth keeping in mind.
The third is that, while purchasing a second enchantment at an equal rank is an expensive prospect, the bulk of that money goes to another player, and remains in the economy. Shifting that cost into Marks of Potency, in contrast, removes all of that AD from circulation, because almost all Marks of Potency are ultimately sourced from the Wondrous Bazaar. Most large-scale currency Sinks in MMOs are for entirely optional items, like a cool looking mount or transmute. There's nothing inherently wrong with large-scale AD sinks for required items, but I want to make sure that this is being done intentionally, and not just accidentally as a side effect of looking for an easy way to maintain rough cost parity while removing duplicate enchantments.
Failing 40 times in a row on a 20% chance is about a 1 in 7500 chance. One out of every 7500 players SHOULD fail 40 times in a row.
Failing 67 times in a row on a 10% chance, by contrast, is only about a 1/1100 chance. Another way of putting that is, out of every 1100 players, one of them was you.
The odds work just fine.
Although I would certainly prefer an STO-style upgrade system, where every failed upgrade adds to the chance of the next attempt. So if you fail a 1%, the next chance is 2%, then 3%, etc, up until you finally get the success and the chance of the NEXT upgrade resets to zero. STO upgrades start at much lower percentages than NW upgrades, though: You'll NEVER see even a 50% chance of upgrade on a first attempt. I think the highest possible upgrade chance is from a 1/year event "RP" item + a lockbox-drop upgrade booster on a Mark II Rare (lowest possible IL) item, and that will come in at about 40%.
(and the item will be Mark VII *and* Legendary when the upgrade finishes, unless you're super-unlucky, so you just need to pump in more RP to get it up to max Mark level and you're good. But, again, it's a different system.)
Why does this awkwardly make R12-R13 enchantments (1 UMoP) 75k and 3 greater enchantment stones less expensive than R11-R12 (2 SMoPs, 3 Greater enchantment stones)
And again, why use 10x GMoP for R8-R9 Weapon/Armor Enchants instead of (2x GMoP + 2x SMoP) or 2x UMoP?
Why use 15x GMoP for R9-R10 instead of (3x GMoP + 3x SMoP) or 3x UMoP?
Why 10 SMoPs instead of 8 UMoPs?
Why 15 SMoPs instead of 12 UMoPs?
I mean, it doesn't really matter as these all have the same AD cost from the bazaar, but smaller numbers often look less daunting.
Currently for 12lvl from 7 you need ~90 preservation wards.
With new system -> 75 + 1 coalescent ward.
So we need more no less.
*9*? It's going to take *9* shards to attempt to make a Lesser now?
Are we at least going to be able to stack shards higher than 20?
It is much easier to get to rank 12 now.
A very long time ago, augments couldn't transfer HPs, but that was changed. Higher shard stacking would be nice. On the other hand, with overall storage demands poised to go down, this might be less of an issue.
I bristled at this increase at first, but then considered that those 9 shards can ultimately turn into the highest rank enchant. Then my reaction was more considering the feasibility of making many, many Elven Battle enchants. Which I would not have done when looking at a need for 16 shards, but more importantly, 4 coal wards. Though this is most beneficial to enchants that never got cheap from lockboxes.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
Reducing the cost by 1/2 on Artifact weapons doesn't make up for all the RP I will lose on these. I have been saving the special stones but wont have my artifact weapons ready in time I think.....