Architect Archive
Thread: Crit Failures on Final Combine
Seems you do care or you wouldn't be so bothered as to post. Greenie? Lol yup your right I am new, did i profess to be an uber lord of Architecture? I think not. Is this some kind of inner circle? Do I have to be a lacky to the miserable tosser architects who don't enjoy playing because they screwed up a few buildings?
Dwell on this. A rich person loses a million pounds. A poor person loses a hundred pounds.
Whats the difference? Not a **edit** thing. Your the one that tunred this into a genetial contest by bringing up your failure to make a PA hall and how I will feel when i fail. I will be angry, I will be upset. But it makes the times you do suceed more satisfying. You don't like failure? Go play Tellie Tubbies game or something. I'm no stranger to faliure in MMPORGS so don't patronise me with your L33T "Master" status crap. I have eyes and ears and I know what others say.
I'm sorry you can't grasp the simple concept of achivement. Achivement without risk isn't achivement. It's called dull progress. If you went through the game never failing anything it would be a simple matter of time before your a master.
I crit failed on a large chemical harvester just yesterday if they had any idea how much time or energy went into making one of those they would fix it so we dont fail on the end product.
Ala 
I strongly beleive in the opposite of whatever Sedryn just said!
But seriously,
There are really valid points on both sides.
I used to be on one side of this issue supporting failures as they are, but some of these arguments here are pretty valid. I too have been hit by disastrous failures, fortunatly not lately, at my lower profit margins they hit harder.
Pehaps they should make it so that we fail more often on components, and less often ( or not at all ) on final combines. They could make change this across the board on all profesions so no one shouts unfair!
I would support that, I am not dying here, but I would support it if others agreed.
Dlarkin wrote:Do you think I care at all about what you have or havent combined? Do you think your rather minute resume is going to impress me at all with what you have or havent accomplished in this game?
Do I care what crafting station you have, or does anyone on this board really give a flying "f" just how great and wonderful your tools are?
No, we dont, and we didnt ask.
And on top of that, my point wasnt directed at you, son, it was directed at the obvious "greenie" (who has since proven me correctly, I might add) to the Architect field that talks about this ficticious "Thrill" that failing on the final combine brings about.
Hmm, perhaps I should paraphrase myself and highlight what I thought the salient points were as I was writing the post.
1. My crit fail rate isn't that bad
2. I use decent quality tools. Not the best, but decent.
3. Perhaps there's a connection here?
4. Is there actually any need to be rude to people on the forums? You sound like a bitter individual, have you had therapy? What does your wife think about you playing a game that stresses you out? Sonny.
5. I'd rather see more experimentation points and crafting skill at master as a means to reduce crit fails than make the climb up the tree faster.
Geno
______________
The Mercantile
Theed, Naboo, Tempest
When I see a string of them starting (e.g. suddenly getting three failures in ten tries) I just put all my tools away and go run faction missions or socialize in the cantina and come back the next day. Wait for the crit monster to get bored and crawl back into his cave.
:-)
As to whether or not we should ever crit on a large final combine? I think it should be very rare, but I don't think it should be eliminated entirely just for us. That's unfair to the other classes (regardless of your math about how little they lose compared to us) and takes all the spice out of final combines.
I would certainly agree with allowing everyone (not just architects) to get a certain percentage of their resources back on a final combine crit. That would ease the pain a bit.
Sobel is right on the money here.
I am only a novice architect trying to make my way, but if you critical fail say, a small house,
1) You should lose the RESOURCES used in creating the house,
2) The wall units, power unit, i.e. nested units should NOT BE LOST!
This would make critical failures fair enough without losing MASSIVE ammounts of resources (6000 resources to me right now is about the same as that 25,000 to you masters, its nearly everything I got)
Good call sobel.
Devs?
I just can't recall the last time I saw a house/factory/whatever under construction, Just fall over. Presumably this would be because the technology is not new but rather tried and found to be useful/successful/stable. I cannot possibly imaginea good reason to have crits on Final assemble for Architects. Clearly this is an idea right up there with weekly moving of the resources. I can't imagine anyone finds it "Immersive" to be standing beside a river in the trees and not be able to find water or wood.
Also why no xp fer failing? Don't we learn from our mistakes? More so than from success, I suspect. Not sayin there should be no risk but please, try to make it logical. How hard can it be to suspendthe disbelief of a crowd that wants (needs?)you to do it?Sry got side-tracked there, heh.
Point is Failing on Final of Structures is just too expensive and does'nt really make sense. If the parts are all good then it's a brick and mortar (sp?) job.
My losses to date on final are 2 factories and 1 Med harvestor.....am working on my first reactor and am not looking forward to final assembly as much as one might think. Everyone cross your fingers.
Re-read Soble's post, that makes more sense than what I wrote.
I'd agree with that
What you "I LOVE loosing man thousands of resource" type people are missing here is we are NOT asking to remove crit failures altogether. We are saying remove crit failures on final combines of structures or remove crit fails where you loose EVERYTHING when subcomponents are involved. You would only loose the raw materials and not the subcomponents that you have ALREADY made and PASSED on.
We don't want crits to go away, just go away on final combines with subcomponents. If I crit fail on a medium house for instance, I should not loose EVERYTHING, justONE of the items. Heck, I could even go for loosing ONE subcomponent because maybe it malfunctioned in the tie-in with the house or something.
Loosing EVERYTHING has no purpose other than making it easier for the programmer at the expense of the sanity of the player. Provide the player with the massive frustration instead of making a little extra work for the programmer. That's all it boils down to.
I believe in risk but this is BEYOND risk vs. reward. What reward do I get for risking loosing 55000 resources?
Scortch, did you read Soble's idea,
We can crit fail but we only loose the raw resoruces not the subcomponents, like walls and turbines and such. They could do that will all profesions so no one would shout unfair.
I like that idea, I think everyone will.
Dayln wrote:Scortch, did you read Soble's idea,
We can crit fail but we only loose the raw resoruces not the subcomponents, like walls and turbines and such. They could do that will all profesions so no one would shout unfair.
I like that idea, I think everyone will.
I think you are wrong, not everyone thinks like you think.
Without a chance to fail there is no success. You yourself made the most fitting of comments in one of your previous posts.
Dayln wrote:I used to be on one side of this issue supporting failures as they are, but some of these arguments here are pretty valid. I too have been hit by disastrous failures, fortunatly not lately, at my lower profit margins they hit harder.
Critical fails occur the way they do (complete loss) and when they do (randomly) for exactly this reason. They mimic real world business hardships. They are unpredictable and can be devestating if you are not prepared to deal with them. They serve a dual purpose, first by providing a disincentive to play the class for a small subset of players unable to overcome them, which is vital. They also provide price support preventing unrealistic devaluation of product.
Changing this process, even slightly, totally changes the rules of the game we have all been playing. To do so would be a boon to those unable to compete currently due to poor business practices and a great detriment to those who have managed their business in a realistic manner to maintain viability. There will be no failures at the cost of there being no success. Would it make it easier for everyone? Yes. Is that a good thing? No.
Tued the Master Builder
Short from installing a gas line incorrectly and the house blowing up there should be some salvagable meterials after a combind. We are not building rockets to the moon but houses that have been built and refined for centuries.
Being able to just salvage some of the componets that where required if even just the factory made items would help. I could care less about the odd's and in's or even the similar wall modules.
This is what I know. Most of the following text is from a previous post of mine. I've since become Master Architect, and STILL follow the guildlines set forth below: (but i use better tools now)
Ever since I crit failed on the 2nd Med house I ever attempted, I've been very careful. (at the time, I was 0/0/0/2 in the skill tree, so looking back, it seems reaonsable)
I've never seen any indications that the quality has anything to do with the assembly process. With the overall effectiveness/quality of the item, it most definitely has an effect. I've never noticed that I crit fail a larger, more complex item more often than a simple one. I built 27 walls yesterday. it took 296 bricks...I failed on 6 bricks, and two wall combines. I will accept a failurerate of 8out of 323. That's something like 2% of the time. I'm not even using the best tools out there, Tool of +10.95 and station of like +8 or so... I'm baffled by people who have failed on 2 out of 3 items. Yes, I sometimes fail 2 bricks in a row, and if i only count those two and the next, i've failed on 2 of 3. On your large combines, did you happen to make 60 items and then try to combine? if you made 50 bricks,5 walls, and 3 other items for a medium house, and then failed on the house, you didn't fail 1 for 1, you failed 1 for 59.
I always make sure to pump out extra bricks when I'm ready for an assembly. I let it all sit in my inventory, and i pump out bricks until i fail. if i don't fail on 10 bricks, then i make a wall to conserve inventory space (and to have materials for my next assembly) and i keep churning out more bricks. when i finally fail a brick, then i make another brick, because the 2 in a row thing does seem fairly frequent after a single fail.
Then I assemble the item i was trying to make in the first place. Since that fateful day where i learned my lesson, i have crit failed on 6 walls and 4 generator turbines. Nothing major, because i always grind out the bricks. I get the impression that the crit fails are just a percentage of your constructed items, with complexity perhaps playing in that equation a bit. But fail 2 bricks in a row (always do one "good" one after your fails), and I think your chances of success on a final assembly are much better. And you certainly could try to use quality materials....while i don't think it helps on anything but the final quality of the product (if quality were an issue), it surely can't hurt.
acer
Moenia, Naboo, Kettemoor