TOPIC: QTR 2025 Beta 4 (with recipes)

2025 QTR Beta 4
Please have a look and let me know if you see anything that needs to be addressed.

For ease of reference, here are direct links to the final contact sheet images:
Common
Uncommon
Rare
Ultra Rare
Transmuted
Volunteer and Participation
Special

Notes:

• When reporting an issue, it's very helpful if you can give its precise location in the file. For example, saying something like, "You misspelled Surtr" is less helpful than something like, "You misspelled Surtr on page 5, column 2, in the description for Flying Baby of Glrn".
• After reading these descriptions, is there anything that's unclear about how each token functions?
• In addition to token functionality, please check for spelling errors, typos, and egregious grammar gaffes.
• We are aware that some of the horned helmet icons are stretched. That'll get fixed later.
• The recipes are very similar to the cost levels of last year's batch, with the exception of the participation Relics.

Thank you for your assistance! 😊

It seems like there is a real problem right now with a glut of Ultra-Rares and prices falling through the floor. I'm concerned that might start impacting new token sales.

I know the Omni Cubes and Orbs have recipes designed to pull some URs out of circulation, but I doubt enough of them will be made to make much of an impact.

Maybe the Relic recipes could include one and Legendaries could include two "Any standard UR from 2018 or more recent" ingredients. It wouldn't add too much cost to the recipes, as URs are readily available for $20 or less now (some as low as $10). Maybe that would help put a bit of a floor on the UR prices.

Largely agree with Mike Steele. Some crafting mats seem to have price-adjusted at this point and don't need immediate sinks. ammunition and pstones in particular seem to be doing well. Perhaps cutting back on them (and/or any other mats as appropriate) in the omni and other recipes in favor of additional URs would be a good idea?

Safehold 1&2 are way too light. 25% of what they should be. Still interested in details of Mythic program..

Mike Steele wrote: It seems like there is a real problem right now with a glut of Ultra-Rares and prices falling through the floor. I'm concerned that might start impacting new token sales.

I know the Omni Cubes and Orbs have recipes designed to pull some URs out of circulation, but I doubt enough of them will be made to make much of an impact.

Maybe the Relic recipes could include one and Legendaries could include two "Any standard UR from 2018 or more recent" ingredients. It wouldn't add too much cost to the recipes, as URs are readily available for $20 or less now (some as low as $10). Maybe that would help put a bit of a floor on the UR prices.

Great suggestion Mike

Rob F wrote: Safehold 1&2 are way too light. 25% of what they should be. Still interested in details of Mythic program..

I agree they should cost more. Maybe one of the changes would be for the recipe to include some of the "any standard UR 2018 or more recent" ingredients or maybe require Omni Cubes and Orbs.

Instead of specifying specific URs with legendary recipes, could increase them to three or four and make them use same rules as Omni for restrictions on which URs. As things go forward, might actually burn out enough URs to raise the floor.

There are a bunch of class specific URs next year that would make good fodder for the legendaries, but I can also see how the Gloves or the Bracers may not fit some theme with the various legendaries. By getting away from naming specific URs that don't seem to have much relevance to the legendaries they go into, help set a floor for all URs.

While the above homogenizes the recipes, my view is that recipes should be differentiated by trade goods more for the high level transmutes. IS transmute more DP, Bracelets more PS, Eyes more MS, etc. Can see how there are some minor differences, but they aren't thematic, anyway. Bracelets requires more DP than IS but IS requires more PS? Why?

Why does the IS require more GF than the more powerful bracelets?

The Omni Cube recipe is essentially 2x the Orb recipe. Aren't relics supposed to be worth more than two URs such that faux-relic should be worth more than two faux-URs?

I have a hard time seeing people make some of the 3*/4*. It's such a tricky space as they don't mean anything in many cases to the people who will get them in treasure. If reduce them in treasure, then they become weirdly scarce.

Thanks for sharing! I think the recipes for the relics and legendaries look good and are on par with past transmutes and expectations.

I would like to make a few Eldritch runestones but the trades goods make it likely I will not for a disposable item. If it was just the rares and maybe one trade good that may make it more appealing.

I was also looking to see if the cost to make Omni orbs will eventually drop. In most cases it’s easier to get the actual recipe token still, I think making this easier to make would also help with some of the issues mentioned above.

In addition to requiring "any standard UR 2018 or more recent", another thought is to hand pick low value / demand URs and select them for a recipe. That did wonders last year for the Amulet / Ring of Wonder, rescuing them from the trash heap.

Maybe if one of the recipes required something like a +2 Staff of Power, that might help reduce the glut of those specific tokens.

Rob F wrote: Safehold 1&2 are way too light. 25% of what they should be.

What possible benefit would that have? They don't do anything, and if you price them too high it makes it an easy decision to just skip both the safeholds and the enabled lackies. As you've said in the past, there is really no reason to play with more than a rare build, so why would more than 1-3 people pay $16,000+ for a SH I?

I'd argue it's likely better to lower the cost of the Safeholds and add some cost to various lackies so you can get people in the door, and then get them to spend some TG to get, say, grunnel.

I thought the safehold recipes were fine - keep in mind, you still have to transmute the sub-components as well. To get to SH 1, we're still talking many thousands of dollars in just trade goods.

I had a thought on the Omni orb and cube. Based on the current recipes, they are (mostly) more expensive than just buying the individual pieces. Perhaps the recipe could be altered to lessen trade good requirements and double (or triple) the UR requirements. That could help with the UR gluts we currently have.

I agree with the prior post about not needing to be specific about what goes into some of the legendary recipes in terms of all the URs. It makes sense for the themed single UR to be the requirement for its advancement into a relic but random legendaries don't follow.
Take Trilliant legendary as an example. Why a +2 rod of focus or holy symbol of Thor? Neither has a thematic tie to the ioun stone. I'd replace those 2 specifics with any 2 standard pack URs and 1 standard pack UR from 2025. By keeping the 2025 UR requirement, it still drives 2025 token sales but also becomes a sink for URs. If the transmute has thematic ties, then keep the named elements. Bibwick's should require a bead - but I'd make it any 2025 UR bead then 2 more UR's 2018 or later (though, I'm not sure why it is 2018 - really any year should be ok.)

I could see the case that only requiring 1 current year UR might drive down orders - it might. If it turns out to be a risk, then go with 2 2025 URs and 1 2018 or later standard pack URs.

There could be an opportunity to bring recipes back closer to the old legendary recipes just by adding URs to offset it. Using Bibwick's as an example, I'd propose the following:
Bibwik’s Bead Bracelets
• Grt. Bead Bracelets
• 1 2025 standard pack UR bead
• 1 2025 standard pack UR
• Any 2 standard pack URs from 2018 or later
• 10× Alch. Ink
• 10× Alch. Parch.
• 2× Aragonite
• 20× D’kwood Plank (5 less)
• 5× Dwarven Steel (10 less)
• 2× Elven Bismuth (3 less)
• 4× Enc. Munition (1 less)
• 2× Golden Fleece
• 5× Minotaur Hide (5 less)
• 20× Mystic Silk (5 less)
• 2× Oil of Enchmnt. (1 less)
• 20× Phil. Stone
• 25,000 GP Eldr. Bar plus ONLY ONE of:
Wish Ring or
15,000 GP in Bars

- Note, this design has the same number of trade 2 (Arag/EB/OE) tokens for simplicity. It makes sense to just standardize these unless thematically something fits (ie Aragonite Sword should have a lot of Arag in it, etc.)
- The additional URs would offset 30 trade 1 tokens

Endgame wrote:

Rob F wrote: Safehold 1&2 are way too light. 25% of what they should be.

What possible benefit would that have? They don't do anything, and if you price them too high it makes it an easy decision to just skip both the safeholds and the enabled lackies. As you've said in the past, there is really no reason to play with more than a rare build, so why would more than 1-3 people pay $16,000+ for a SH I?

I'd argue it's likely better to lower the cost of the Safeholds and add some cost to various lackies so you can get people in the door, and then get them to spend some TG to get, say, grunnel.

You don't even need a Rare build to play TD. You don't need Tokens, play with the 10 pack you get. Get people in the door? Solved. Safehold V. Safehold 1&2 are not for new players. Rewards program is what this whole thing is. I understand today's culture is all about instant gratification and everyone feels entitled to everything. Sad. Sad it is. Back in the day not everyone had a Castle, they were far and few between. But there is no right or wrong recipe costs. The only thing Jeff has to ask himself is how soon does he want to have to come up with a Safehold 2.0 program. That's it, that's the only thing when it comes to the top tier recipes. Increasing reciepe costs gives Jeff more time before he has to do something like this again....and it also prevents everyone from having a Castle.