Talk:Verb:INSPECT: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "Capacity range rant: The small range capacities are quite irritating. I did a major inventory of my containers shortly before the INSPECT update and quantified all capacities ...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Capacity range rant: The small range capacities are quite irritating. I did a major inventory of my containers shortly before the INSPECT update and quantified all capacities so I was able to share some limits of the new ranges right away. The fairly-somewhat small boundary remains a bit elusive. Short of finding a 13lbs capacity container, based upon how deepening works, one could only deepen to 13lbs from 9lbs or 11lbs. Prospects don't look good. Many containers in this capacity range don't weigh enough to be deepened much, if at all. And it seems like the odds are a bit slanted in favor of certain capacities. I recently had the opportunity to deepen a container with a progression which crossed that boundary (10, 12, 14, 17, 20, 24 ...) which gave me one 14lbs "somewhat small" data point. I also lucked out with another 14lbs treasure-found container. Up until then, having checked almost every "somewhat small" container I've found, 15lbs was the only capacity observed (lots of containers). I'm about to add in details for "few", "several", etc messaging. On those values, I'm very confident with my results. I just noticed that these weren't present. |
Capacity range rant: The small range capacities are quite irritating. I did a major inventory of my containers shortly before the INSPECT update and quantified all capacities so I was able to share some limits of the new ranges right away. The fairly-somewhat small boundary remains a bit elusive. Short of finding a 13lbs capacity container, based upon how deepening works, one could only deepen to 13lbs from 9lbs or 11lbs. Prospects don't look good. Many containers in this capacity range don't weigh enough to be deepened much, if at all. And it seems like the odds are a bit slanted in favor of certain capacities. I recently had the opportunity to deepen a container with a progression which crossed that boundary (10, 12, 14, 17, 20, 24 ...) which gave me one 14lbs "somewhat small" data point. I also lucked out with another 14lbs treasure-found container. Up until then, having checked almost every "somewhat small" container I've found, 15lbs was the only capacity observed (lots of containers). I'm about to add in details for "few", "several", etc messaging. On those values, I'm very confident with my results. I just noticed that these weren't present. |
||
[[User:EASTMANM2|EASTMANM2]] ([[User talk:EASTMANM2|talk]]) 22:55, 29 April 2015 (CDT) |
[[User:EASTMANM2|EASTMANM2]] ([[User talk:EASTMANM2|talk]]) 22:55, 29 April 2015 (CDT) |
||
:The fairly small range is 8 to 11. [[User:GS4-VANAH|GameMaster Vanah]] ([[User talk:GS4-VANAH|talk]]) 10:30, 30 April 2015 (CDT) |
|||
Revision as of 09:30, 30 April 2015
Capacity range rant: The small range capacities are quite irritating. I did a major inventory of my containers shortly before the INSPECT update and quantified all capacities so I was able to share some limits of the new ranges right away. The fairly-somewhat small boundary remains a bit elusive. Short of finding a 13lbs capacity container, based upon how deepening works, one could only deepen to 13lbs from 9lbs or 11lbs. Prospects don't look good. Many containers in this capacity range don't weigh enough to be deepened much, if at all. And it seems like the odds are a bit slanted in favor of certain capacities. I recently had the opportunity to deepen a container with a progression which crossed that boundary (10, 12, 14, 17, 20, 24 ...) which gave me one 14lbs "somewhat small" data point. I also lucked out with another 14lbs treasure-found container. Up until then, having checked almost every "somewhat small" container I've found, 15lbs was the only capacity observed (lots of containers). I'm about to add in details for "few", "several", etc messaging. On those values, I'm very confident with my results. I just noticed that these weren't present. EASTMANM2 (talk) 22:55, 29 April 2015 (CDT)
- The fairly small range is 8 to 11. GameMaster Vanah (talk) 10:30, 30 April 2015 (CDT)