The math behind the green gem efficiency of thulecite crown crafting

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

So, while it's still seemingly not worth the trouble, I thought I'd do some math for those who do want them sweet crowns for good, fancy head gear.

The math is actually a bit convoluted...

If you start with "n" amount of thulecite, then the math per time you use up a construction amulet would go about like this:

n - 2 (this is where you craft a construction amulet, which takes away 2 of your existing thulecite),

n - 5 (this is where you craft a thulecite suit and a deconstruction staff, both using the amulet, which results in loss of 40% from the construction amulet, aka 0.4 green gems),

n + 1 (this is where you first deconstruct a thulecite suit, gaining +6 thulecite, in total equating to 1 more than you had before. The following is just a continued process of constructing and deconstructing thulecite suits via construction amulets and deconstruction staff respectively, until...),

n - 2,

n + 4,

n + 1,

n + 7,

n + 4,

n + 10 (construction amulet breaks, deconstruction staff stays at 20%. Total green gems used up for this process = 1.8, which gives 10 thulecite more than you had initially, aka n + 10).

Now, the question I brought up to myself is whether it's worth/more efficient to use a construction amulet in order to craft thulecite crowns. To determine this, I needed to find out the total amount of green gems used in order to create a certain amount of thulecite crowns.

10 thulecite normally equates to 2.5 thulecite crowns. With a construction amulet, with its thulecite included, you could craft 4 crowns for an extra 0.8 green gems used up.

So, it's 2.5 crowns for 1.8 green gems, or, 4 crowns for 2.6 green gems... Seems like both are pretty close, if not the same, right? Well, lets try and get the crown amount to be the same for both equations in order to determine how much of them each use up the green gems for the same amount if thulecite crowns as each other. Lets scale the numbers up a bit first though by like, say, 10 times, so we get 25 crowns for 18 gems and 40 crowns for 26 gems.

Then lets divide the crowns' amount to equate the same amount, so 25/5 = 5, 40/8 = 5. The same must then be applied for their respective gem amount and with that we will get an answer for this question:

18/5 = 3.6

26/8 = 3.25

Well then... If my math is correct, then it is slightly more efficient to use construction amulets for crafting thulecite crowns. Hope this is useful for somebody out there when crafting those sweet sweet crowns, in case you've been crafting them without an amulet this entire time ^^

[KoreanWaffles]

I remember figuring this out when I first started renewing Thulecite via Thulecite Suit deconstruction! I thought to myself, "Wow, every suit only nets me 3 Thulecite; that's like not even a single crown."

Although I didn't quite follow the same thinking as you did.

Going at the rate of 3 Thulecite per suit, I came to the same conclusion that 1.8 Green Gems would net me 10 Thulecite, including the cost of the Construction Amulet, which is ~5.56 Thulecite per gem. I quickly came to the conclusion that I should use amulets to craft crowns. Since crowns cost 4 Thulecite, each construction would save me 2 Thulecite, which means each amulet would save me 8 Thulecite including the cost of the amulet. That's like 44% more efficient than crafting without an amulet! Not only that, but as an added bonus, you save 10 Nightmare Fuel as well!

Now let's take this one step further. What if we constructed Construction Amulets with Construction Amulets? Since a Construction amulet costs 2 Thulecite, each amulet would net us 5 Thulecite; that's almost as much as Thulecite Suit deconstruction! If Construction Amulets costed just 1 extra Thulecite, then Thulecite Suit deconstruction would only net 9 Thulecite, which averages to 5 Thulecite per gem, the same amount of Thulecite you would save from constructing Construction Amulets using Constructions Amulet from which you constructed from a Construction amulet that was constructed... Just a thought.

Of course, you still have to deconstruct Thulecite Suits for Thulecite, but with the new Heart of the Ruins update, deconstruction will no longer be the only way to renew Thulecite! Depending on how often we can regenerate the Ruins, perhaps we can get rid of Thulecite Suit deconstruction altogether and just raid the Labyrinth for Thulecite.

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

You rarely get some though. I raided multiple chests and only got 6 thulecite from one, with the occasional thulecite fragments. Me and my friend were lucky to get 6 green gems from the ancient guardian upon our first kill, although I don't think this will continue every time... Will need to check the loot tables.

If earthquakes simply dropped thulecite fragments, or at least the ancient gems during earthquakes, depending on whether by the lore thulecite is just fossilised body structure of the ancients (although unlikely that that's the only thing that it is if that were the case, since it seems like they used it themselves for the ancient pseudo science station and thulecite walls), then that could make thulecite crowns something that can be decently relied on with the occasional ruins visit.

Increasing the chances of and possibly the amount of thulecite normally found in ornate chests and large ornate chest could be an alternative too. Both options being in place sound fun to me.

On a side-note, what's really stupid is that when the shield is on and something's cheeing on it, your crown loses durab... I don't believe that used to happen nor happens in single player, to my knowledge. Like what's even the point of the shield if the crown's just gonna lose durab anyway? The shield was meant for tanking when you get it, right, so why? The durab loss thing means that you won't utilise the already rarely-used feat of the crown. For instance, I could tank hounds for 5 seconds sweat free or let it help me beat them consequently if a hound attack gets me in a real bad position, however the durab loss means like, what the hell is the point? They'll just eat up my armour like it's nothing, and you already get sanity penalty for every melee attack the shield blocks! May be this is a bug, although I'm not sure. @V2C could you please change this?

[HamBatter]

15 minutes ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

On a side-note, what's really stupid is that when the shield is on and something's cheeing on it, your crown loses durab... I don't believe that used to happen nor happens in single player, to my knowledge. Like what's even the point of the shield if the crown's just gonna lose durab anyway? The shield was meant for tanking when you get it, right, so why? The durab loss thing means that you won't utilise the already rarely-used feat of the crown. For instance, I could tank hounds for 5 seconds sweat free or let it help me beat them consequently if a hound attack gets me in a real bad position, however the durab loss means like, what the hell is the point? They'll just eat up my armour like it's nothing! @V2C could you please change this?

That was mentioned on a stream as intended, but I can't find it as they seem to be removing some to keep under a threshold. (Are we allowed to archive them elsewhere?)

[Begeesy]

I did the math on this a long time ago so i might be rough on the edges. Of course just using green gems for amulets gives you more NET but they require more loss for the transaction. You need 12 thul for each gem you have(assuming you do it the most green gem efficient way like I do), that 12:1 ratio could quickly build up. On the other hand, in deconstructing, theres just a 5 thul 2 green gem entry fee. After that, green gems are the only limiting factor. For example, with 34 thul and 4 gems it's better to deconstruct because by strictly using amulet you wouldn't be able to utilize all the gems.

In conclusion, best way to get the most bang out of your buck is to first deconstruct until you get 12 sets of thul more than you have gems then you strictly use amulet.

I made the exact functions of the most helmets you could get with each strategy but it's not ready for the public yet.