User talk:Hexorcist

Potion ValuesEdit

The ingredients used to make a potion do not matter in the potion's value. Go to some category in your alchemy lab (such as "Fortify Health") and try all the different combinations. You'll get the same potion with the same value every time. The exception to this is the rare few ingredients (like nightshade) that have a stronger effect than usual. However, that still doesn't matter, because the stronger effect of the ingredient is reflected in the stronger potion/posion.

You can determine potion value from the final result without any knowledge of its constituent ingredients. Chris3145 23:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

You are just as incorrect today as you were yesterday. Had you looked at the TSV I posted you would see why. Every ingredient that has Fortify Health has a magnitude of 4 for that effect. The only variation is on the duration side of the house with Giant's Toe at 300 instead of 60. Of course when you multiply the same number by the same numbers every time you will get the same result. Try your experiment with, lets pick an easy one, Restore Health. Mix these ingredients and inform me of your results:

• Eye of Sabre Cat, Blisterwort
• Blue Dartwing, Blisterwort
• Blisterwort, Imp Stool

Without entering the game I can tell you the results based on alchemy level 100, with no perks:

• 30 health
• 30 health
• 18 health

The reason why is something that I've been telling you for the past couple days, it's not guesswork. There is a formula, I did post it. I'll post it specifically for you:

• (floor(alchemy_level/5)*.1+4)*max(magnitude_from_ingredients).

With the formula posted a second time, here's what you can deduce from the formula:

• max(magnitude_from_ingredients) = 5
• max(magnitude_from_ingredients) = 5
• max(magnitude_from_ingredients) = 3

Oddly enough, those numbers match *exactly* what the output from the Skyrim.esm says in my TSV. Again, not guesswork, it's a direct dump of the ENIT information in the INGR records. From that you can further deduce that Eye of Sabre Cat and Blue Dartwing have a max magnitude of 5, resulting in a strength of 30 with no perks while Blisterwort and Imp Stool have a max magnitude of 3 resulting in a strength of 18 with no perks.

Here's the math in simplest form:

(floor(100/5)*.1+4)*(5|3) -- example.

• 100 / 5 = 20
• * .1 = 2.0
• + 4 = 6
• * (5|3) --- this is where the max(magnitude_from_ingredients) is in the formula, note the 5 and the 3 in there? Which is larger? The 5, so...
• 6 * 5 = 30

Next question - what is the _minimum_ strength of a magnitude 5 health potion? Well, the same formula will tell us.

(floor(1/5)*.1+4)*5 = 20. 20 is the least amount anyone could make a magnitude 5 health potion for, however since magnitude 3 is the lowest magnitude available for health potions...

(floor(1/5)*.1+4)*3 = 12

Thus, with no perks a health potion will range from 12 health to 30 health depending on a) ingredients and b) alchemy skill. This same formula is used when the magnitude_from_ingredients = 0, or = 100, but on the duration instead.

I trust that this consolidation of information has caught you up, now can we _please_ move away from duration and magnitude, since it is obviously old news, and focus on something that has yet to be figured out. Such as a formula to get the value (septium) of the potions? Please? I've only been saying it for a couple days now. Hexorcist

I don't know where the TSV you posted is, and even this long explanation doesn't offer any indication that the two 30 magnitude potions would have different values, but Fluff posted a short table to the Alchemy Effects talk page, and it makes sense now. You were right - two seemingly identical potions made from different ingredients can have different values. (Or a weaker potion can have a higher value than a stronger one.) Chris3145 15:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Unless when you say potion value you actually mean potion strength. In that case, we've been talking about two different things the whole time. Chris3145 15:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

That's just it, the two with the result of 30 are the _EXACT_SAME_ because the magnitude_from_ingredients is 5... on BOTH with no change in duration because the duration is the exact same even though you use different ingredients. I do believe I said in my reply that "when you multiply the same numbers you will get the same results" or something to that effect. The magnitude_from_ingredients of 3 on the Blisterwort in the first example is _ignored_ because 5 > 3. How does that not refute your claim that "ingredients don't matter"? As for the TSV, it shows you haven't read the replies in the discussion, how could you possibly know what's going on if you don't read about it before jumping in? My first post in that discussion pointed someone to the TSV (erroneously - it was the wrong page, but no fear, he posted a proper link to the right discussion page.)

Even the tables you pointed out in your reply has a reply from me pointing out the reasons for the anomalies found in Fluff's table aren't misunderstood, they're documented.

I've been very clear on my wording. Mentioned two times that when I say "strength" I mean the magnitude of the effect in the resulting potion, when I say "potion value" I mean just that - the septium value (I've used those words also, in fact, once in this very discussion page in reply to you) of the resulting potion. When I say "magnitude" alone I'm speaking of the max(magnitude_from_ingredients). I made a specific single line post saying "maybe we should use 'strength' for the result in the potion to keep confusion down." The issue is that you haven't read it, which could very well explain why you're trying to prove me wrong on a formula that you obviously didn't see, and the documentation behind that formula which you apparently haven't read.

I have one request for you. Before replying to this, please, read everything said in that discussion. Look at the discussion where my TSV is located and read everything in that discussion (it's not long, but it tells you where the values in the TSV came from). When you've done that if you have any questions at all I'll be more than happy to answer them if I'm able to, but as of right now the issue is confusion on your part based on not reading what is clearly stated. I would be more than happy to have your assistance with this, but unless you read over what has already been figured out and stated, you're just going to slow it down. Seriously, everything you've mentioned here has been discussed. I'm not saying I'm correct, but to refute what I have said it will take more than just a value from a random potion and guesswork. I find that to be a bit insulting after I have spent so many hours on this and posted everything needed to refute your claim before your claim was made. With that said, I do apologize if I sound cross in my replies.

In news of findings, I believe I found the extra number(s) that I've been looking for so this all may come to an end in the very near future - those are my hopes anyway. If not, I'll post what I've found and let others see if they can make a formula work with it. Hexorcist

From what you posted to me, it seemed that all you were talking about is making a stronger potion from stronger ingredients. I know that some ingredients are different. A river betty makes better damage health potions than other ingredients. This obviously means the potion is a higher value (because it's better). The TSV you posted doesn't show anything related to values, from what I can tell. It has magnitudes and durations. The odd thing isn't that making a posion with a river betty gives you a higher value posion - that's a logical result of a higher magnitude poison. Based on just that evidence, I would seem that ingredients are still irrelevant in calculating a potion's value - once you know its effects and strengths, you should still be able to calculate value from that. (i.e., ingredients determine magnitudes, but even if you didn't know the ingredients, you can still use the magnitude to determine value.) It turns out this is wrong.

The anomoly, which you did not describe in your discussions with me, shows up in the table that Fluff posted. Nightshade + Nirnroot and Nightshade + Troll Fat both produced poisons with identical magnitude but different values. Likewise, there are some weak potions that are worth more than stronger equivalents. That was the evidence you need to present to show that ingredients are relevant to potion value.

Simply showing that different ingredients give you different strength potions doesn't demnostrate that ingredients matter to potion value. The fact that ingredients matter in the value only shows up when you present potions of identical magnitude with different prices, or different magnitudes, but prices that don't correlate as expected.

I thought we were on the same page, but now I'm certain now, as the evidence you present doesn't support the conclusion I've now reached, even though our conclusions match. I just thought it made sense to do one calculation (based on ingredients and alchemy skill) to determine potion effect and strength, then use a second calculator to determine value (based on the potion's effects and magnitude). I see now that the two calculator method won't work. Your posts to me, and the TSV file, don't demonstrate that, although Fluff's table does. Chris3145 18:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

From your reply I have determined a few things. One being that you still have not read the discussions, and part of that is based on wanting me to feed the information directly to you via this discussion page. It wont happen. If you want to join us in figuring this out you have to show that you can understand what we already do -- by reading what we have already posted. Nearly everything you stated is incorrect. From the first sentence, which is grossly incorrect (I stopped working on strengths before you decided to chime in on the discussions, Fluff and I both told you this), to the last (Fluff's tables actually prove my formulas, and prove that magnitude and duration affect value). You insult me again by trying to say that the work I've done is wrong, when you have nothing to show for yourself. If that wasn't bad enough, you spit in my face by completely ignoring my extremely simple request to read the information that is available? Why should I respond to you? You haven't given me ample reason, and thus I now request that you refrain from replying to this post, and I will do the same with yours. Any further post on my discussion page will be viewed as harassment and an admin will be requested to deal with it. Put simply, I do not have the time to hold your hand and walk you through what it has taken me hours of work to figure out, either you read it and you understand it or you don't - either way you must first _read_ it. Again, I expect that you can respect my request for abstaining from replying to this post, and I will no longer be replying to you anywhere (discussions, this discussion, my forum thread for this topic, etc).

Good day Hexorcist

Sorry. I didn't mean to be rude, and I don't mean to insult you. I have read the TSV, your post on the alchemy effects page, and your posts to me. There's a communication breakdown somewhere between us (it could easily be on my end). The first paragraph in my previous reply was the hypothetical that I had believed, but I now know to be untrue. I have reached the same conclusion you have (it isn't just the magnitude and duration that affect a potion's value, but also the ingredients used to make it), but I didn't understand it until I saw Fluff's examples. Again, I apologize. I don't want this to end in a state of animosity. Chris3145 22:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)