Emerald pouch sizings are very weird and rows are pointless

Hello,

I am having a problem understanding the point in the EM pouches tier 2/3/5/6/8/9/10 having multiple rows.

Below, we see the tier list with the details on conversion and capacity.
This is taken straight from the wiki entry on Emerald Pouches.

However, there is one issue I cannot figure out.
For any of the relevant pouches of tier 7+, we have both sort of an

• actual, hard limit (cf. max capacity), at which point no more emeralds are collected (or so is my understanding). So once I max out a tier 7 pouch at 1stxLE, any collected emerald should pile into my inventory again (or so I understand the max capacity)
  
• theoretical, soft limit (max spaces). In theory, if we ignore the hard limit we would assume the limit is reached once you cannot pick up emeralds anymore because all fields are filled - so on the tier 7, we would have 9 rows of LE's (aka 8*64+1 LE). At this point, the pouch would have no free inventory to take on em's or EBs, and thus cannot convert

Now, I call this an theoretical limit because, as I read the description and wiki, this is unachievable.
The number of stacks of LE is limited to 1/2/3/4 stxLE. At that point, the pouch would also be unable to convert up to EB's because its capacity is reached.

This means that on the tier 7-9 pouches, we have

• 1*9-1=8 [T7]
• 3*9-2=25 [T8]
• 6*9-3=51 [T9]
• ?*9-4=? [T10]

spaces of LE-stacks which will max out the capacity. And as such, any additional spaces are essentially unusable. They cannot be used.

Now, on the tier 4-6 pouches the table seems to be correct:

We get

• 1*9*64 EB == 9 LE
  
• 3*9*64 EB == 27 LE and
• 6*9*64 EB == 54 LE

And here, the max capacity actually fits with the number of rows a pouch has.

Going by that (imo more sensible) pattern, tiers 7-9 should have a much higher total cap, specifically
[T7] 2359296 Em
[T8] 7077888 Em
[T9] 14155776 Em



Now, the actually given hard limit that are given for tiers 7-9 (as well as tier 10) seem arbitrarily chosen, as they don't fit in with the previous method of filling all slots with the maximum number of emeralds in the form of the highest currency the pouch can convert to.


So this begs the question...
Why do emerald pouches have rows, as they are never usable? Why is the limit so incredibly low compared to what it seems it should be?
Or what might I be missunderstanding here?

Additionally, because I could not find it yet, what is the capacity of the T10-bag? Does it follow this odd trend, or does it actually have the capacity it should have, based on its number of rows?

Sincerely,
~Bq

---

Below we find the calculations I used to make this post:

 

i don't really see why it matters? you could argue that the capacity upgrade from 6 to 7 is a bit lackluster, but the advantage of converting to le instead of eb is significant. the capacity of all the high tier pouches seems totally adequate - holding 54stx in a single pouch would be overkill imo

t8/t9 having 3 and 6 rows is rather pointless, but i also don't think it's important enough to be worth changing

 

Oh it's not really a major major issue, but just something really confusing. It gives unnecessary, confusing information which is good for nothing, and why that is the case is neither immediately noticeable nor obvious.

My point was more to emphasize that the item description is at worst misleading regarding the expected capacity, and at best simply wrong. I would also not want to claim that 54stx would be an adequate sizing, but illustrate the gap between what the item can be interpreted as compared to what it is.
I suppose in the end it comes down to a distaste for empty, misdirecting selling points - which this is, if boiled down.
The entire existence of pouches with multiple rows makes one assume those rows to have any actual value, but they don't.

But I think either the curve for LE-converting pouches should get adjusted upwards to yield more storage at tier 7 (and thus at 8 and 9 as well to get proper spacing inbetween the tiers again (idk about what tier 10 actually specs at, so I can't judge where it lies), or at the very least the description should get rectified to better reflect how the pouches actually do and don't work.

Out of curiosity, do you see T7 as high tier, or does that start at T8 for you?
I see it kind of as an interim, because it's the first bag that can actually convert into a long-term unit, but not having the capacity to store an actual somewhat usable wealth in it. I am at ~40 LE right now, 4 of which I got with a horse for a pumpkin back in fuck-I-don't-remember-when. Aside from those 4, almost the entire rest has been achieved on a lv 79 mage class mostly focussed on quests. I think like seven of those LE might be Seavale mining during podcasts, idk. And there is probably a small amount (prolly ≤4le) I got farmed up on other misc. low level classes before my long break (back when sharpness was a thing, and elements were not).
And idk really. T7 seems a bit too small, but at the point you buff T7 you also need to buff the rest because the difference would otherwise just be as comically small as it is from T6→T7 right now. (All while not being reflective of their comparatively high prices, imo)

 

t7 is too small??? why would you ever need to carry more than a stack of le? just dump the excess in your bank

 

the pouch tooltip tells you very explicitly how many emeralds it stores, though? i don't see how this argument holds any water whatsoever

pouches aren't intended to be replacements for your bank - they're a way of collecting emeralds without being limited by inventory size and without completely cluttering said inventory

 

Yes it does. And then it gives a meaningless information about space that is many times bigger than the capacity. Even worse, it actually gives this wrong information, namely number of rows, first, and only then adds the actual limit as an addendum to that. It's not even the primarily displayed info out of the two given. Nor highlighted in any way.

And if you look at a pouch with 3 rows, it stands to reason that these rows serve any function besides eye candy. Why the space, if it is unusable? Why even include the info on them having 3/6/7 rows, if they are never, ever gonna be used? I understand not making a custom gui the exact number of slots necessary for function (which would be #ofLEStacks+2 for conversion functionality), but I cannot grasp why they are anything more than a single vanilla sized row.

You are right, the bank exists. But then what's the point of anything above t7 anyways? I don't think there's any viable way to spend anything on that magnitude, beside TM, and that pulls from bank as far as I know. So there's really no point in them existing under that assumption then.

Yes, compared to t6 I believe it is. I understand that the main point of T7 is to allow LE conversion, but the capacity change is way too small to actually allow for it in a reasonable way. Aside from that, this would then also invalidate the existence of t8+, because what's the point of those, if we arbitrarily assign 1stxLE as a good cutoff for carry-around-money?

---

Bottom line is that you can look at the pouches in two ways:

1. either as temp emerald holders while out of town, with the intention of dumping excess cash into the bank when returning,
2. or as an actual means of carrying any amount of wealth. In this case, tiers are either poorly and insensibly scaled to actually reflect that purpose, or t8+ shouldn't even exist because they are pointless.


Regardless of that, that tooltip is terribly worded and should be reworked to highlight what's actually going on.

---
And obviously, any pouch having more than one row is unnecessary in any way you look at it, and that information should be removed from the tooltip for clarity. Anything more than a single row is pointless and only adds to confusion about sizing.

 

tldr: most of us dont care and we dont need a lecture for this

________________________________

also u should put this is general suggestion and set up a poll, let people decide if this is really necessary

 

Is there a way to move posts?

________________________________

I also don't intend this to be a lecture - I merely think that the items require fixes with regards to the wording, as that is simply misleading, and that it eithe suggests a purpose that may or may not (more likely?) be intended, or that it is a rather badly executed way of doing so.

 

idk man i just don't think it's that deep. i don't think anyone is gonna get "misled" by the row count in any meaningful way

 

That’s what I mean

________________________________

Just copy what you type here to there

 

Well ik this is a ocd post but the rows arnt achally pointless as it caps how many emeralds you can put in in one go so to explain it a bit better, i was doing some lootrunning just to get a few emeralds and well it didnt go well as i had somehow ether accedently collected a T3 pouch or picked one up off the floor and managed to nealry fill it up before realising why I seemed to be so bad at this, once i noticed transfering from the nearly full t3 to my t7 was a pain as you can only do 6 and a bit stacks at a time as t3 does not autoconvert and once the t7 has 1 slot of LE and 1 slot of EB with then some spill over into a 3rd slot, you are only left with 6 and a bit free slots to insert more emeralds into, i fully get its neice use case and fully agree that the cap should be first as thats the more important limit but its very minor at best
as a second very minor thing, i also like the rows being a distinguishing thing as with a lower row count when you have the pouch open it takes up less of the screen so you can still see more
so all it all not useless but i defo agree with saying negligibly useful