Rune Stacking - Yes or No?

[Flix 5,162]

We can add the ability to stack runes.  Doing so will save inventory space.  

EDIT: Read the whole thread to see how all my original arguments for voting NO were set aside due to coding developments.  In the end, I too voted YES.  As such, I left my original arguments for the sake of clarity, but crossed it out to indicate that the downsides to rune stacking were overcome in the end.

But, it will also make the bonuses on all runes in the stack identical.  So, if you have a low level Darting Assault Rune with +1 Darting Assault and 2.0% Chance to Poison, then every Darting Assault rune you pick up afterwards will be added to that stack and the bonuses conformed to match it.

This means you would have to check each rune that drops before you pick it up, and make sure that you don't already have a lower-level stack of that rune in your inventory already, or you will lose the higher level bonuses.

In essence, you're trading one kind of micromanaging for another.  You won't have to constantly look through an inventory filled with dozens of individual runes, but it will now be up to you to always check and make sure you're not adding high level runes to low level stacks in your inventory.  One method to do this is always keep runes in your player stash, where stacks don't upgrade.  

You could also spend 125000 gold to upgrade a single rune, then reverse upgrade the stack.  This is basically a cheat feature, since you can add low level runes to high-level stacks, if this change is made.

Sacred 2 players, is this trade-off worth it?

[dimitrius154 614]

>"check each rune that drops before you pick it up"

 

Not quite correct. Runes stack by CA's they represent. All runes spawn with the same level throughout the current difficulty level, their boni values determined by their static level and the difficulty. If you change the difficulty level, gather new runes and decide to merge stacks, then rune level and rune difficulty value are conformed to the first rune in stack. That's where the micromanagement part kicks in.

[Dragon Brother 619]

I would vote for yes. I can't honestly think of a scenario where socketing runes is useful except for at low levels and if as Dimitrius says the only thing impacting the bonus is the difficulty it drops in, then you are probably not going to be changing difficulty any time soon to progress past silver which I doubt would significantly impact the bonus level.

Otherwise, could you make all runes drops with the same bonus level regardless of difficulty?

[Flix 5,162]

>"Otherwise, could you make all runes drops with the same bonus level regardless of difficulty?"

Yes, we could, but I fought against that initially.  I was certain that players would hate that, but maybe not?  I have to admit I rarely if ever socket runes myself, but I assumed some builds relied on it.

[Yaohu 18]

given what Dimitrius clarified, I would say "Yes to stacking Runes"

Keeps the Inventory nice and uncluttered and if we switch Difficulties, all we have to do is put the runes into the Chest before going off slaying monsters

 

[Dragon Brother 619]

2 hours ago, Flix said:

>"Otherwise, could you make all runes drops with the same bonus level regardless of difficulty?"

Yes, we could, but I fought against that initially.  I was certain that players would hate that, but maybe not?  I have to admit I rarely if ever socket runes myself, but I assumed some builds relied on it.

Not knowing the progression off the top of my head / remembering all the details, the real benefit is the bonus to that specific combat art right? The higher the difficulty rune, the higher the bonus to the CA when socketed? I suppose that is potentially an issue, especially given not all players will have access to a shopping network capable of finding +All CA's which does increase the value of socketing the rune.

Hmmm...not sure about this now. It might actually be that the benefit outweighs the impact to the base functionality of the runes. But again, thats dependent on how much they are actually socketed...

[Flix 5,162]

A Niobium rune would give +5 to that combat art, plus a very high level of the additional bonus that's only granted when the rune is socketed.  

Also, when you socket a rune, you only get half the regeneration penalty than if you read the rune.

I linked to the runes page in my first post if anyone wants to refresh on the subject.

[Androdion 894]

Would it be possible to stack runes the same way as potions? Potions stack according to their size, runes could stack according to their level. That would basically remove the further micromanagement because only runes with equal bonuses would stack together.

Otherwise, meh, I don't really know if I like the idea or not. Call me Switzerland on this.

[BrainMuncher 7]

Not sure why anyone would want a stack of runes in the first place. Are there people out there hoarding runes? They drop frequently and you can craft whichever rune you need on demand at the rune guy... seems kind of pointless. Fixing something that isn't broken.

[Yaohu 18]

the high droprates ARE the reason stacking would be a nice feature. I mean really... the runes simply clutter up the inventory after a while. Stacking would definitely reduce that issue

[Flix 5,162]

The one and only reason for this change is saving inventory clutter.  Runes fill up the inventory and stash FAST.  I won't deny that.

The reasons against this change are... everything else I listed.  I'm against the change, but I agreed to abide whatever the forum consensus is, if there is one.

[BrainMuncher 7]

I just ctrl-click to sell them so I guess I've never had a problem with clutter

[Saraphima 34]

Hmm if you can stack runes could you stack other items or increase the number of a stack? It would be great if potions were 99 instead of 20.. I like the idea but only if the runes are an exact match stats. If it could be done for any item that would also be nice

Edited September 19, 2017 by Saraphima

[Schot 411]

Ok, so I think this is what I would end up doing if rune stacking was implemented with the knowledge that low level runes or stacks of runes would cause higher level same runes to be absorbed into a stack and adopt the lower level rune's stats.

Upon entering a higher server level I would either immediately sell my runes/stacks, store them in my chest or upgrade them.  This would become a routine for me.  Do I have the general logic correct?

Could you not filter more specifically though?  So that bronze runes only stack with bronze, etc?

[dimitrius154 614]

>"Could you not filter more specifically though?  So that bronze runes only stack with bronze, etc?"

 

No, there's no explicit function checking that byte of the item data.

 

But:

Stacks are created based on blueprint match. Rune Level is controlled by difficulty only: Bronze - 1, Silver - 1, Gold - 20, Platinum - 35, Niobium - 50. Item level in a stack is defined by the first item of that stack. A stack is updated if present in player inventory and the player picks up an item with the matching blueprint. It's not that easy to botch something.

 

[Schot 411]

Ah, that's a shame. 

Well personally I could easily manage fine with stacking runes but...  Only because I have read this topic.  The problem I would see with this feature is that it may be perceived as a pesky bug.  For those who don't read the fine print.  Would you implement an in game popup warning about the change so players would be well aware?

Also...  I don't think I have quite a clear idea of the proposed feature.  Initially, I had the impression that this would be an automatic function and that I would have no control over the stacking.  It would just happen as I picked up drops.  Upon a second read I get another possible impression that stacking would be manual. 

Can someone give a brief step by step of how this feature would behave?  Am I drag-and-dropping runes manually to initiate the stacking of runes?  Or will it be an automatic constant as I play along?

[Dragon Brother 619]

I think reading through the above discussion and thinking more about it I'm leaning more towards leaving the functionality as is. This is mostly because, as has been pointed out, the change is only to reduce inventory clutter whereas the side effects impact the base functionality of the game. "If it isn't broken, don't fix it" springs to mind, runes not stacking isn't a bug, and ultimately I don't recall it ever being more than a minor nuisance.

However, in saying that, there are people still playing the game regularly, unlike myself, for whom this may be an issue so I completely understand if the end result is to implement this change.

Regardless of what is implemented I (and I'm sure many others here) do appreciate the opportunity given to the community to provide their input onto shaping the continued direction of the CM patch, so thank you to the team.

PS: Flix, I don't think I can update my response to the poll so you'll just have to remember that I'm now voting the other way.

[Schot 411]

For fun, I created a site wide announcement pointing to this topic to see if we can get more feedback...

@Dragon Brother I looked but didn't see an option to remove your vote.  I'll probably look around more.  That should be an option!

[Androdion 894]

I still maintain my neutral stance, hence not voting yay or nay because I can see both situations being both helpful and harmful at the same time. When in doubt leave it as is I'd say.

[Androdion 894]

2 minutes ago, Schot said:

For fun, I created a site wide announcement pointing to this topic to see if we can get more feedback...

Yeah, and the background green colour eats away any visibility on it.  Best to try a different colour in the future.

PS: Got ninja'ed as the green turned blue. All is well now, carry on.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Androdion

[Schot 411]

Oh, lol.  Noted!

[dimitrius154 614]

>"Can someone give a brief step by step of how this feature would behave?"

 

As potion stacking does.

 

An example:

 

A player has found a Fireball rune and is keeping it in immediate inventory. Any Fireball runes found and picked up are stacked, until the stack size equals 50. Then the next stack in immediate inventory is created. 

If the player moves a Fireball rune, or a non-topped off stack of Fireball runes to stash, any Fireball runes found next do not stack with those, unless the player drops both and then picks them up.

To extract runes from a stack, hold SHIFT and left-Click on a stack, then select the extracted amount.

 

The "dreaded" event of rune properties change happens if the player has moved to another difficulty, found some more Fireball runes, has kept a Fireball runes from an easier difficulty, has decided to merge two stacks,  dropped both, took the weaker one first.

 

It's also worth noting again, that rune stacking only works for the same CA runes. Fireball stacks with Fireball and so on.

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2017 by dimitrius154

[Caledor 27]

I voted against mainly for the potential (albeit minor) cheating feature of upgrading stack of runes. IMO this is not something that should be introduced by a patch so widely spread and whose main goal is restoring content.

[Schot 411]

@dimitrius154  Thanks for clarifying!

I can understand the concern regarding the exploit of this feature and was totally on board with the fact that that would be wrong...  Until I remembered that we actually provide chests full of runes as downloads.  So for me the concern of exploit is no issue.  People can download runes to their hearts content if they want. 

The fact that we can download runes may also make the possibility of high level runes turning into low level runes when stacking a non issue.  Maybe?

I'm having greater and greater difficulty finding a reason to vote no but won't vote until I feel confident in a choice.

[Flix 5,162]

4 hours ago, Schot said:

Well personally I could easily manage fine with stacking runes but...  Only because I have read this topic.  The problem I would see with this feature is that it may be perceived as a pesky bug.  For those who don't read the fine print.  Would you implement an in game popup warning about the change so players would be well aware?

Yeah, see that's the thing.  Where could I put that?  I could put it in a loading screen tip, of which there are hundreds.  The player may never see it there, especially since the new memory-flushing protocol we implemented now skips the loading screens oftentimes (sorry folks).

I feel like someone should be able to read the official manual and/or years of Sacred 2 documentation on the web and not have it contradict the CM Patch.  I think some players will feel blindsided by it, regardless of whether or not they ultimately would be agreeable to the change.