*looks at his arrows and scratches his head*

[Hellblazer]

Well this is a strange one, don't know if it's a bug or just the lens having problems. But I just made a few hundreds platty oak raven and stirge arrows and the level requirement the lens gave me was 18....

Now unless I was asleep for a couple of months, I know Feh is still only level 14 and he is able to use them.

Intriguing to say the least, but now it makes things harder to get the true LR for these so I can post them in his sale thread.

So well, is it just the lens or has something else been done so those are now usable even if the LR of the lens says otherwise?



edit: It actually gives the same LR for Iron tipped oak stirge arrows.

[Cinnabar]

I've noticed similar and it seems that the level requirements are a function (inexplicably) of the quantity. Try separating the stack into 100 arrows and look again. I think you'll find the level requirements correct then

[Hellblazer]

Nice catch thanks

[darkstorme]

Actually, that's quite explicable.

The level requirement of items is dependent on their cost - this isn't something that can be changed; it's hardwired into the engine.  All that can be done is to set the "cost threshold" at which level requirements take place.

So a stack of 500 arrows would be five times as expensive as a stack of 100 arrows, and therefore... *grins*

[Hellblazer]

Ermn not to sure, but if that is the math that would make the arrow at 3.6 level requirement?

Anyhow the trick of Cinnabar works

[darkstorme]

That assumes that the level requirements are linear, or indeed that they follow any sort of pattern, geometric or arithmetic.  There is no such restriction, so without the 2da handy, there's no easy way to determine where the lines are laid.

Regardless, good to know you've found a workaround.

[Dorganath]

Nah, it makes sense, since I think Bioware based the "cost" on the assumption of 100 (or rather 99) arrows in a stack, not 500. I don't think we refigured the cost profile when we changed the maximum stack size, and since it doesn't seem to affect play negatively, then it's not terribly likely to get fixed, among the many other priorities we have.

So yeah, quirky but explainable at least.