Talk:INFUZ-5959

Service

INFUZ-5959 [Merchant] was introduced in the patch notes as "A new vendor, INFUZ-5959, has been added to the Mistlock Observatory" and "Added an INFUZ-5959 infusion vendor". Has a new unique overhead+map icon that's a combination of agony and a stack of coins (merchant icon). Service is probably "Infusion vendor" (as per patch notes) or "Infusion merchant" (merchant because [Merchant]). --BryghtShadow (talk) 20:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I've added both new icons File:Agony merchant icon.png, and File:Agony npc icon.png. Feel free to move/rename them as you wish. I can't remember exactly what they are for nor think of a way to properly name them. -Darqam (talk) 20:39, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Cheaper?

It appears that using INFUS-5959 to buy your way up the agony ladder is slightly cheaper than crafting them. A +3 used to cost 4 +1s and 4.488s, but now it's just 4.480s (and 4 +1s). Am I correct?Daddicus (talk) 03:26, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

You are correct. It costs exactly 4  48  via golem. Reagents cost 14  96  per 10, which is 1496/10*3 (448.8) copper. For the sake of rounding, it takes 3 to make a +3AR, so I'll buy 30 reagents to make 10 +3AR. That costs total of 44  80  at INFUZ-5959, and total of 44  88  via artificer. Edit: fixed typo.--BryghtShadow (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

The other bulk prices are cheaper than crafting. Even more if you upgrade it step by step (I think I did the math correctly?)

• +3 AR = 4  48  vs 4  49 
• +5 AR = 22  40  vs 22  44 
• +7 AR = 94  8  vs 94  25 
• +9 AR = 3  80  80  vs 3  81  48 
• +11 AR = 15  27  68  vs 15  30  41 

Another thing to note is that... you're not buying any extra reagents that you don't need (so making a single +3 only costs 4  48  and 0 remaining reagents, rather than 14  96  and 7 remaining reagents). On the other hand, you have to be careful that you only make the required amount, and time may be more valuable than gold so doing a direct +1 to +N conversion takes less time. --BryghtShadow (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Good. I'm not going nuts. Thanks!Daddicus (talk) 19:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)