Radiant Star Gems: Need some tweaking

General Discussion
you guys realize price went down in the last patch.

its like 200gold to make a radiant or so


It cost 100 gold, 1 page of jewel crafting, and 2 square gems to make a flawless square gem.

The cost for tier 9+ gems did not decrease.
06/21/2012 10:07 AMPosted by Flammy
Actually i understand it being a gold sink. But currently I have no reason to sink gold into the gem system beyond a Radiant Square Gem. My money and time is better off being spent on upgrading my eq via the AH


Great. You're not alone playing this game, if radiant square works for you let people who want radiant stars make radiant stars, the stat gain is very small anyway.


You every complain about crafting? How the items sucked and wasnt worth putting your gold into it?

One of my suggestions was to put the modifiers of the higher gems to make them more desirable which in turn makes more people want to spend their money on them.

My favorite suggestion is to actually allow ilvl61-63 gems to drop at the same rates as eq.
The jump from 500 gold to 30k then 50k and so on seems a bit excessive. Specially if you need the recipes to even unlock the higher up gems.

I wouldn't mind making the trainable gems cheaper so everyone can be on the same level.

Leave it to those who farm the recipes and sell those to then invest the money into crafting the top tiers.
You don't convert to a Radiant Star all at once.

Let's do some basic maths together, taking your numbers, note that I didn't double check your numbers. I took the current AH prices for the tomes, and the price of the most expansive Flawless Square (emerald at 574g)

Radiant Star = 15.05m + 1631 mats + 729 gems

15.05m + ( 515g * 1631 tomes ) + ( 574g * 729 gems ) = 15,050,000 + 839,965 + 418,446 = 16,308,411g

Only 16.3m gold for the best gem in the game. The number doesn't even impress me and we're in the first month of the game. Imagine in 3 months, 6 months, a year.

You carry the same gems around you and upgrade any gem found to a superior gem. Where is the issue? There isn't an issue.


if 16.3 million gold is nothing for you, I will gladly accept that sum of money
06/21/2012 11:41 AMPosted by Alteredfreak
if 16.3 million gold is nothing for you, I will gladly accept that sum of money


+1
Are you implying that there are items that are actually worth $100M? Or $1B?


Thank you for stating that you don't know how economics works.


And thank you for taking the time to make a useless and inapplicable statement about nothing.

If the perfect economic model of supply and demand you smugly refer to was in line with the amount of gold available to players that weren't buying, botting or cheating otherwise, most players would be sitting on about 15M gold tops. Please tell me what economic lesson inside your control world applies to these prices and why most of the player-base is not able to buy them.
So the average player has 15M gold. The dedicated player has 45M. The dedicated player that got really lucky with some good item drops has 200M. That guy has managed to loot 4 or 5 of the best items in the game, and sell them to other dedicated people, or average players that were really lucky.

When you have 6 million players, some people will get really really really lucky with good drops. That's just statistics.

What happens? Yes, there are people out there right now ready to spend 100M on a weapon and 15M on a gem to go in it, and its just 1 month into the game.

That guy that sold that 100M weapon will have 85M.. Guess what? He's ready to spend 85M on a weapon he can use.

That guy that sold him an 85M weapon? He just got 70M richer, and ready to spend 70M on a really good weapon.

Money doesn't just disappear when its used in the AH. 85% of it goes to the seller, who probably turns around and spends it on something else.

There's a nice math function. How many times can 1g be used on the AH? Sum e from 1 to infinity, .85^e .
So the average player has 15M gold. The dedicated player has 45M. The dedicated player that got really lucky with some good item drops has 200M. That guy has managed to loot 4 or 5 of the best items in the game, and sell them to other dedicated people, or average players that were really lucky.

When you have 6 million players, some people will get really really really lucky with good drops. That's just statistics.

What happens? Yes, there are people out there right now ready to spend 100M on a weapon and 15M on a gem to go in it, and its just 1 month into the game.

That guy that sold that 100M weapon will have 85M.. Guess what? He's ready to spend 85M on a weapon he can use.

That guy that sold him an 85M weapon? He just got 70M richer, and ready to spend 70M on a really good weapon.

Money doesn't just disappear when its used in the AH. 85% of it goes to the seller, who probably turns around and spends it on something else.

There's a nice math function. How many times can 1g be used on the AH? Sum e from 1 to infinity, .85^e .


By dedicated player, you mean those that have a ton of free time to spend on this game, not those that have one or multiple jobs and a family.

My suggestions are there for the average player.

The following is just a guesstimate: 6 million players and only 25% of those can afford a radiant gem without worrying about the money. The next 25% could afford it but arent willing to spend it on them because of what they get for their money. Then you have the next 50% that will not be able to afford it for a long time because they dont get lucky, exploit, or have as much free time to acquire the gold, plans, and mats that are required to make a radiant star gem.

It is these average players that will support the longevity of diablo 3. Why? Because the hardcore/dedicated players will always be here. So why not make all of these options such as gems more desirable/reachable for these average players. My ideal solution is to allow those ilvl61-63 gems to drop. If that happened you wouldnt need to make it cheaper to drop in the terms of gold because you can cut how much gold you spend by getting some of those gems to drop. I also like bumping the stats a bit that the gems offer starting at star level (double the normal increase that they already have)
OMG some of you have nothing better to complaint?
If you can't afford a BMW, get Honda instead.

Very soon many can afford a 19mil gem.

I bought a star gem, and my next level of gem will be Flawless Star.
When people spend 50mil on 1 gear, an extra 10mil does nothing.


By dedicated player, you mean those that have a ton of free time to spend on this game, not those that have one or multiple jobs and a family.

My suggestions are there for the average player.

The following is just a guesstimate: 6 million players and only 25% of those can afford a radiant gem without worrying about the money. The next 25% could afford it but arent willing to spend it on them because of what they get for their money. Then you have the next 50% that will not be able to afford it for a long time because they dont get lucky, exploit, or have as much free time to acquire the gold, plans, and mats that are required to make a radiant star gem.

It is these average players that will support the longevity of diablo 3. Why? Because the hardcore/dedicated players will always be here. So why not make all of these options such as gems more desirable/reachable for these average players. My ideal solution is to allow those ilvl61-63 gems to drop. If that happened you wouldnt need to make it cheaper to drop in the terms of gold because you can cut how much gold you spend by getting some of those gems to drop. I also like bumping the stats a bit that the gems offer starting at star level (double the normal increase that they already have)


So fail. So fine, we give the average player the best gems (+58 dex) in the game after 1 month (makes sense, ... in someone's mind, I guess).

Then blizzard creates a super radiant star gem that is +60 dex, a tiny fraction better, designed really only for the dedicated players and cost 100M gold. Something designed for those that do play 10 hours a day to work towards in the next few months.

The average whiner (player, you) says oh I want that too, but I can't afford the 100M gold they cost, and these +58 dex gems are lame. GIVE ME +60 dex and give me it now, and for free! I play 1 hour a night, I want the same toys that those people playing 10 hours a night get!

So fail. So fine, we give the average player the best gems (+58 dex) in the game after 1 month (makes sense, ... in someone's mind, I guess).

Then blizzard creates a super radiant star gem that is +60 dex, a tiny fraction better, designed really only for the dedicated players and cost 100M gold. Something designed for those that do play 10 hours a day to work towards in the next few months.

The average whiner (player, you) says oh I want that too, but I can't afford the 100M gold they cost, and these +58 dex gems are lame. GIVE ME +60 dex and give me it now, and for free! I play 1 hour a night, I want the same toys that those people playing 10 hours a night get!


I never said to give anything to anyone. Im saying make it more desirable. Gold sinks are intended to take gold out of the economy. If the gold sink isnt worth putting gold into it, isnt it a broken mechanic? Crafting sucks so no one crafts until it is fixed. Gems arent worth the money or time so few will put money into them.
Your original post said:

(currently the most cost effective gem is Radiant Square)


for reference here are some prices:
perfect square: 30k + 3x Tome of Secrets
radiant square: 50k + 6x Tome of Secrets
star: 80k + 9x Tome of Secrets
flawless star: 100k + 12x Tome of Secrets

What makes radiant square "most cost effective"?

Is it the one with the best stat per gold value? Let's see
perfect square: 32205g, 38vit, 847g per stat point
radiant square: 150095g, 42vit, 3273g per stat point
star: 535505g, 46vit, 11,641g per stat point
flawless star: 1713475g, 50vit, 34,269g per stat point

Why would you pick "radiant square" as the most cost effective". Is it personal preference on what feels right?

I mean, you stated the obvious answer in your original post, but you kinda ignore it:

06/21/2012 09:01 AMPosted by Jestix
Now are those stats really worth the cost in gold? I think the only way you can truly answer yes to that question is if you have a full set of perfect gear and have all the extra gold just sitting there and nothing to spend it on.


So .. why did they make tier 14 gems? It's not for you. Its for the people to use WHEN they get the perfect set of gear. (AND that doesn't happen 1 month after the game is released, at least not for you).

Let me break this down top to bottom, using your idea that the perfect gems are for the perfect gear, which we'll call "perfection tier level 14" or just "tier 14" for short. Next we'll say there's almost perfect gear... that's tier 13. Those people would be good using tier 13 gems? Slightly worse gear? that's tier 12.

If I have tier 14 gear, I will use tier 14 gems. We agree this is normal.
If I have tier 13 gear, the "right" gem is tier 13 gems.
If I have tier 12 gear, the "right" gem is tier 12 gems.
and so on.

To me you're just saying "I have right now Tier 11 gear, but I want to use Tier 12 gems", make Tier 12 gems cost less.

for reference here are some prices:
perfect square: 30k + 3x Tome of Secrets
radiant square: 50k + 6x Tome of Secrets
star: 80k + 9x Tome of Secrets
flawless star: 100k + 12x Tome of Secrets

What makes radiant square "most cost effective"?


Radiant Square is where I started the calculations previously.

The following spread sheet shows how much it cost in gold per 1 attribute, how much it cost in gold for the +4 attribute to upgrade to the next tier, and cost difference per point for each upgrade.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aio_Ol8JnARidGtLTzFxak44bXhJYi10ZFNkV3VzZXc
Gold based economy for the win!
It's worth it. You can always sell the gear with the gems in them. You can get higher stats than equipment without slots that way. If you fill em with radiant star gems. People pay more for the best stats. Can sell top tier items with radiant star gems in it for lots o moneys.
Gems being priced high are actually a better model than making them easy to obtain. For one, the highest level gems are not required to complete the game. They are examples of luxury items. Secondly, after you've beaten inferno you'll still have something to work towards.
.I've been playing D for 12 years, I watched people pay 100 Runes for a 198%ED Eth HOZ shield! That being said I'm at a stand still with lack of gold and if i want to spend that much to make my Radiant Square Amethyst a Radiant Star Amethyst because it's alot of funking money! But 190 Life on hit to 600 life on hit is a huge increase (back to my 100 runes for a almost perfect eth HOZ) Id rather pay gold then what ever the equivalent is now to runes (witch were crazy hard to find legit!) there's a metric !@#$ ton of gold to be made in the game. Your missing the point that there is pay off for spending that much gold and getting a 410 life per hit increase as in my case, It's a end game item and your pissing and moaning about not being able to obtain a end game item when the games been out since May 15th........Suck it up princess earn your %^-* all that time you spent calculating gold cost I was doing Inferno act 1 butcher runs making 40-80k in 20-30 minutes.
06/24/2012 10:02 AMPosted by Hcbuda
Suck it up princess earn your %^-* all that time you spent calculating gold cost I was doing Inferno act 1 butcher runs making 40-80k in 20-30 minutes.


Ok, so 50k per 30min, 100k per hour you make. A set of 10 top gems (max number of sockets) is around 160mil. If you make 500k per day (assuming 5 hours played) you will only need 1 year!!! of playing Diablo 3 every day, 5 hours per day, to afford that, for 1 character.

Enjoy your $hitty game.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum