Suggestion [Plugin] - TransmuteOre

[Volk]

I believe that Alchemists should have a transmute ore for emeralds.

 

[mikehk]

probably mining in the wrong place. emerald ore only spawns in extreme hills from level 32 downward. a diamond block is worth well over an emerald. also, i'm pretty sure you cant make diamonds from charcoal.

 

[Volk]

That's the idea is transmute up. Im very sure I was mining in the correct area is it such a terrible thing to ask for an alchemist transmute ore for an emerald? How does that not fit into the description of "transmute Ore". Why is it such an awful thing to ask for a an update so we can transmute this items. Is it really that bad? Please explain to me (mommymax mikeehk purpledragonfly) why an alchemist shouldn't be able to do this.

 

[Volk]

probably mining in the wrong place. emerald ore only spawns in extreme hills from level 32 downward. a diamond block is worth well over an emerald. also, i'm pretty sure you cant make diamonds from charcoal.

That is completely irrelevant to the topic. Explain why an alchemist shouldn't be able to do this or please keep it to yourself. I'm talking about an ability alchemist should get, you're talking about milk and cookies.

 

[Volk]

Not "please increase emerald spawn rate". I didn't ask for such a thing. This isn't a topic about "I need help getting emeralds" this is a topic of why or why not alchemists should or shouldn't be able to transmute ore into emerald. After all emerald on minecraft is in fact, a rare ore. I didn't think I had to spell this out for you neanderthals. But apparently I do. Go to college, take English 101 and then come talk to me we might be able to have a conversation.

 

[mikehk]

That's the idea is transmute up. Im very sure I was mining in the correct area is it such a terrible thing to ask for an alchemist transmute ore for an emerald? How does that not fit into the description of "transmute Ore". Why is it such an awful thing to ask for a an update so we can transmute this items. Is it really that bad? Please explain to me (mommymax mikeehk purpledragonfly) why an alchemist shouldn't be able to do this.

That is completely irrelevant to the topic. Explain why an alchemist shouldn't be able to do this or please keep it to yourself. I'm talking about an ability alchemist should get, you're talking about milk and cookies.

Not "please increase emerald spawn rate". I didn't ask for such a thing. This isn't a topic about "I need help getting emeralds" this is a topic of why or why not alchemists should or shouldn't be able to transmute ore into emerald. After all emerald on minecraft is in fact, a rare ore. I didn't think I had to spell this out for you neanderthals. But apparently I do. Go to college, take English 101 and then come talk to me we might be able to have a conversation.

three posts within 6 minutes, no replies between, and some serious rage. first of all, dude, calm down. second of all, my post was entirely related to the topic, i was stating you were probably mining in the wrong place because it's never taken me more than an hour EVER to find an emerald if I actually looked. I was also informing you that a diamond block is worth more than a single emerald, so it would most likely be a pointless skill that maybe one alchemist out of 50 would use once in their lifetime as alchemist. lastly, I was stating that you cannot make diamond from charcoal, so I was proving a point you made in your original post wrong.

another thing, I never stated I didn't want a transmute to emerald skill, you're pulling statements out of your ass there.

however, now that you mention it, I don't think that alchemists should get a transmuteore for emerald anyways. emerald is supposed to be a merchant item, used for trading, and a reagent for smithies to rename stuff.

a change to transmuteore i can suggest is lowering transmute for iron-->gold. gold is not worth as much as it was last map, and I suggest it be lowered to 11 ingots, or 10 ores (instead of 20 ingots, or 18 ores).

 

[Volk]

You're wrong mike. You CAN make diamond from charcoal.

 

[Volk]

 

[Volk]

 

[Volk]

Shut your mouth milk.

you're pulling statements out of your ass there

No I'm not. Stop lying, Mich.

you're pulling statements out of your ass

I was stating that you cannot make diamond from charcoal, so I was proving a point you made in your original post wrong.

cannot make diamond from charcoal, so I was proving a point you made in your original post wrong.

so I was proving a point you made in your original post wrong.

Proving what point was wrong? Your own? Go read a book kid.

You're the only one who's wrong here Michelle.

How's your foot taste? You're the guide. Stop assuming you're always right.

Your ego needs taken down a notch.

I don't think that alchemists should get a transmuteore for emerald anyways. emerald is supposed to be a merchant item, used for trading, and a reagent for smithies to rename stuff.

What a joke. Because we have recipes in potions that require diamonds right? Using that logic we shouldn't have transmute ore. It's a trade item. You're right. Alchemy is a trade. Emeralds restore mana why wouldn't they want it? Alchemists are about convenience and usefulness, not absolution.

three posts within 6 minutes, no replies between, and some serious rage

Irrelevant, wrong, you're assuming things again, you're wrong, you don't know me, and just to be clear, you're wrong.

 

[mikehk]

Irrelevant, wrong, you're assuming things again, you're wrong, you don't know me, and just to be clear, you're wrong.

lol, dude, lay off the crack. also, i'll admit to being wrong about the charcoal.

another thing: insults, namecalling, and spam posting on the forums will eventually get you banned from posting.

I stand by the ideal that alchemists dont need emerald transmutes.

 

[RagingDragon5]

@Volk, act your age please. It's hard for people to see your point when you are acting this way.

 

[Volk]

@Volk, act your age please. It's hard for people to see your point when you are acting this way.

I'll defend myself whether you like it or not dragon. I think the more childish act was rating all my posts badly.

Sorry that I'm not allowed to back my statements? You should be ashamed of yourself.

But you are right, pretty good eye, normally I am more level headed.

another thing: insults, namecalling, and spam posting on the forums will eventually get you banned from posting.

Of which I did none of the above.

I'm not seeing how emeralds aren't a transmutable ore or why Alchemists shouldn't have it.

 

[Volk]

I stand by my suggestion. Emerald is a new material that should be a transmutable item for alchemists. I believe that it would add more versatility to the profession, and replenish some of it's usefulness. In current updates the alchemist has been ignored for quite some time, and unfortunately because of the complacency it's not a valued profession anymore. Engineers can make potion machines with hoppers now, so what else does an alchemist have besides it's cauldron?

It would be nice to see the alchemist be given back it's niche.

 

[RagingDragon5]

I rated "dislike" and the posts I didn't like. I don't see how that is childish. Anyways you say you were defending yourself but no one insulted you when you started raging. You can back up your statements but the way you did it is ineffective. If you reread all of the posts in this thread you will be able to see it. If you cant then whatever. Anyways I'm out.

P.S. I liked the idea, disliked your unreasonable attitude.

 

[Volk]

Fair.