Convert Emeralds To The Metric System

Controversial suggestion I know. Make 1EB 100 emeralds and 1LE 100EB or 10000 emeralds. Considering how market can take emeralds from your bank, they could probably just take all the LE and eb from everyone's bank and give them back new LE and EB from the market or a separate merchant. It would complete the transition started by the addition of the market to count prices by emeralds instead of EB and LE.

 

Not a bad idea, but in my opinion I like the way it is.

 

How would you get around the fact, that minecraft is hardcoded to only stack up to 64 items? Even if the limit was changed to 100 on the server's side, you wouldn't be able to utilize it without modding the players' clients, which'd be completely against Wynn's 6 year long motto of "no mods required". Alternatively, do you think it'd be neater to say "1eb is worth 1.5625 stacks of emeralds", or "1eb is worth 64 + 36 emeralds" just to get the numbers right? Just imagine wanting to make a small transaction such as 4eb 20e through plain emeralds without traveling to a bank, and having to count (4 * 100 + 20) / 64 = 6.5625, aka 6 stacks and 0.5625 * 64 = 36 individual emeralds, instead of instantly seeing it's 4 stacks and 20 individual emeralds.

As for the conversion from old format to new, you should really consider the risks of meddling around with +2 million accounts that have up to 1272 slots each.

In short, this suggestion has holes, which you should probably think about and resolve before posting it. Until then, power of 2 is still a pretty clean and understandable method of handling money business.

 

Just FYI i’m not taking this suggestion super seriously, I don’t even know if I would want it tbh. It was mostly just to start a discussion.

Implementation aside, I think you are vastly exaggerating the confusion that changing the value of EB and LE would cause. The market already most prominently shows the costs of things in emeralds. Say you have 20 stacks of current le. Can you tell me how many emeralds that is without getting a calculator? Current le is 4096 emeralds. New le would be 10,000 emeralds. That means that 20 stacks of current le would become approximately 8 stacks of new le. Each stack of new le is 640,000 emeralds x 8 = 5,120,000. It makes the math with large numbers so much easier. Your example of 4eb and 20 emeralds doesn’t even make any sense. Under the current system that’s 276 emeralds but under the new system it’s 420 emeralds. The whole point of this change isn’t that people would no longer have to think in terms of eb and le. If I want to sell something for 276 emeralds, it’s 2eb and 76 emeralds, easy as that. If I want to sell something for 420 emeralds it’s 4eb and 20 emeralds. The one area where this change makes things harder is selling stacks of items. If I want to sell something for 4eb each and I have a stack of it, the whole stack costs 4le. Consider selling something under the new system for 256 emeralds aka 4 current eb or 2 new eb and 56 emeralds. If I want to sell a stack of that item I have to multiply 256x64 = 16384 emeralds or 1 new le, 63 new eb, and 84 emeralds. However this problem is somewhat mitigated by selling items for prices which are divisible by 10, 100 or 1000, which would happen much more often if that were the new denomination for eb and le. If I instead sell the same item for 300 emeralds each, a stack sells for 19,200 emeralds or 1 new le and 92 new eb.

 

This post is essentially just repeating the same thing 3 times, but oh well, maybe you'll pick up the point this time.

This is a major flaw with your suggestion, that causes right about everything else to collapse over it. For the most part, it seems like you're suggesting the system as if emeralds were exclusively used on the market, on an automated system where storage is irrelevant. Meanwhile, in reality, right about everything apart from the market relies on how money is stored: Stacks of 64, without a workaround. Not sure if you've noticed this, but a huge portion of trades are still conducted manually, whether that's because of the market's tax, for the sake of bargaining, socializing, or other reasons. In addition to trades between players, you also pay all merchants of the game through cash, not a debit card that magically connects to your bank from all around the world. In all of these situations, including the conversion between units itself, the limit of 64 plays a role which doesn't exactly favor the system of hundreds.

I can, but even if someone can't, that's the point. With the current system, there's no need to calculate anything excessive, since 20 stacks is 20 stacks. So far, the marketplace is the only exception in the entire game that doesn't work on this system, because utilizing only a single base unit for inputting item prices speeds the process of selling items, regardless of how the unit transfers to its more valuable counterpart. Even with the current system, the only thing you ever need to do, without exceptions, is to either divide or multiply by 64 to convert between units. Depending on the values, that might still require a calculator for efficiency's sake, but that's still less steps than calculating with the system of hundreds in practical use.

As a concept, it sounds super simple to just say 100eb = 1le. Then you realize, that the system of hundreds doesn't align with the game's storage methods. Therefore, if you pay someone 1le 80eb, that's not really 1le 80eb, but 1le 64eb 16eb, since smaller units don't stack all the way up to the bigger units. To me at least, this seems like a pointless extra step that turns a slightly complicated system into an even more complicated one.

Another way to visualize what's wrong with this system would be to imagine that hours are 100 minutes long. With that, a clock would count minutes from 0 up to 60 as it usually does, set them back to 0, count back up to 40, and only then swap over to the next hour and restart the cycle.

The value difference is irrelevant to the point of this situation. The point is how the conversion works. Too bad you ignored the concept as "Implementation aside"

Now that that's out of the way, let's go back to your former issue of twenties. Can you tell me how many stacks of eb 20le is with the new system, without a calculator? Sounds at least a tiny bit more complex than just saying 20 = 20, eh?

Spoiler: (The solution, should you need it)

20 * 100 / 64 = 31,25

(And also 0,25 * 64 = 16 to even it out for this particular instance. Let's just ignore it for now, since it didn't seem to make sense to you the first time)

Sure, it's not rocket science by any means, but as I already mentioned, it's a pointless extra step for the most part.

I also wouldn't imagine someone'd be able to point out "Oh, you have 31 stacks of eb and 16eb? That's 20 le!"

If you're not sure about whether even you want something implemented, maybe don't vouch for it on a section dedicated for serious ideas? If you want a debate on the topic, there's other more relevant sections you could use over Suggestions. For example, Wynncraft works for more casual open debate, and Feedback works if you have an issue with the current system. In Suggestions you're more likely to receive heavy criticism instead of a mutual debate. I'd also recommend reading this pinned thread:
https://forums.wynncraft.com/threads/how-to-suggest.174609/

 

At this point i'm treating this argument as an exercise in debate. I don't necessarily disagree with your points, but question their validity. I also don't like the fact that you're trying to paint me as an idiot. I don't mind harsh criticism, as long as its sound.

Your refutation of my counterargument is really the same point over and over again. You can't seriously suggest that people go around with stacks of emeralds or eb and trade them without converting up. Banks are extremely accessible. As an aside, all merchant now display their prices in emeralds, not eb and le. There is just as little reason to know how many stacks of eb are in 20 new le as it is to know how many emeralds are in 20 stacks of le. If something costs 80 new eb, is it really hard to count out 64 and 16? What I meant when I said "implementation aside" is to disregard the ease or difficulty of actually converting Wynncraft from the current system to the new system, and focus on the usability of the system if everyone woke up tomorrow and it was all magically in place.

 

Though this isn't necessarily a bad thing on paper, the system we use now is fine as it is. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.