Armorsmith Archive

---

BigAke wrote:

you are mistaken.

Solid petrochem doesnt have any shock resistance (no malleability and unit toughness either, so the following will apply to all experimentation categories), therefore it will only influence the weighted average overall quality which will then contribute to the maximum experimentation (at 50% - like the schematic says)

Just take a short look at the composite breastplate, it takes 400 resource units (that all have overall quality as one of their attributes) - 100 of these 400 units consist of solid petrochem, therefore the weight of solid petrochem overall quality is 100 / 400 = 1/4.
so solid petrochem will only contribute to the maximum experimentation with 1/8 of its overall quality - because the experimentation is just 50% overall quality.

However since it doesnt have any shock resistance, it will be totally dropped from the calculation of the weighted average shock resistance - effectively raising the importance of shock resistance of all remaining ingredients. (this is also true for all other crafting recipes that require ingredients with "missing" stats - but only if at least one ingredient has that stat)

the intrusive ore will contribute 1/8 of its overall quality to the maximum experimentation, just like the solid petro (since the schematic requires 100 units, too), but when calculating the weight of the shock resistance we see that only 300 units of the composite breastplate have shock resistance, so the weight of intrusive ore shock resistance is 100 / 300 = 1/3.

so the 1/6 of shock resistance of the intrusive ore will contribute to the maximum experimentation (once again, the experimentation is 50% shock resistance)

in summary:

intrusive ore and solid petrochem constitute 1/8 + 1/8 + 1/6 = 5/12 ~= 41,7% to the maximum experimentation.

important side note:

just because solid petrochem is missing shock resistance, shock resistance on the remaining resources is slightly more importatant than overall quality when considering a single experimenation category (but remember that overall quality also contributes to the other experimentation categories)

---

---

Srednii wrote:
Are there any irons or steels with good (900+) malliability?

---

No

Duralloy steel has the highest at 600 MAX I believe

---

BigAke wrote:

the only inorganics that cannot be categorized in classes are fiberplast, lubricating oil, polymer, water as well as all unknown subtypes (that means unknown ferrous metal and the like)

---

---

Nester_of_Yavin4 wrote:

---

BigAke wrote:

you are mistaken.

Solid petrochem doesnt have any shock resistance (no malleability and unit toughness either, so the following will apply to all experimentation categories), therefore it will only influence the weighted average overall quality which will then contribute to the maximum experimentation (at 50% - like the schematic says)

Just take a short look at the composite breastplate, it takes 400 resource units (that all have overall quality as one of their attributes) - 100 of these 400 units consist of solid petrochem, therefore the weight of solid petrochem overall quality is 100 / 400 = 1/4.
so solid petrochem will only contribute to the maximum experimentation with 1/8 of its overall quality - because the experimentation is just 50% overall quality.

However since it doesnt have any shock resistance, it will be totally dropped from the calculation of the weighted average shock resistance - effectively raising the importance of shock resistance of all remaining ingredients. (this is also true for all other crafting recipes that require ingredients with "missing" stats - but only if at least one ingredient has that stat)

the intrusive ore will contribute 1/8 of its overall quality to the maximum experimentation, just like the solid petro (since the schematic requires 100 units, too), but when calculating the weight of the shock resistance we see that only 300 units of the composite breastplate have shock resistance, so the weight of intrusive ore shock resistance is 100 / 300 = 1/3.

so the 1/6 of shock resistance of the intrusive ore will contribute to the maximum experimentation (once again, the experimentation is 50% shock resistance)

in summary:

intrusive ore and solid petrochem constitute 1/8 + 1/8 + 1/6 = 5/12 ~= 41,7% to the maximum experimentation.

important side note:

just because solid petrochem is missing shock resistance, shock resistance on the remaining resources is slightly more importatant than overall quality when considering a single experimenation category (but remember that overall quality also contributes to the other experimentation categories)

---

Nah,

Its been stated time and time again that Resources that don't have a certain attribute, count as 1000 in the final assembly of said characteristic. If what you are saying were true, it would be impossible to get a 45% crafting station because Inert gas is used as one of the materials in the microsensor suite, which has an experimentation category of conductivity... but we have some folks a heck of a lot smarter than I have already cracked the experimentation breakdown of crafting stations and discovered this to be true

I played an Architect at launch, and other architects took the statement you outlined above as THE OPPOSITE of what it really was... They were using lubricating oil in their schematics instead of polymer and finding out that their experimentation was significantly lower because they tried to "trick" the named resource percentages you have outlined above.

Bottom line is its not nearly as hard as people think...

SR/OQ = Armor effectiveness (based on gated max of named resource attributes)

MA/OQ = HAM

---

I will disagree with you and side with BigAke on this.

I have seen first hand that 2 wooly hides with equivallent OQ +SR gave different experimentation results.

Wooly 1 was high OQ, low SR

Wooly 2 was low OQ, high SR

OQ + SR was actually a few pts higher on wooly 1.

Armor made with wooly 2 had 1% higher base eff...

Because I was real close to the next % and the higher weight of SR was just what I needed....

Besides try to make stims using both organics and inorganics without UT stats.

You will notice the amount of charges is lower than if you used an organic with UT.

If 1000 was taken by default when a resource didn't have that stats, it would be higher....

I was an architect too and used lubricating oilon crafting harvesters instead of polymer and I achieved higher result not lower... It all depends on what is the UT of the others resources you used and the UT of the polymer you were using....

---

Nester_of_Yavin4 wrote:

Nah,

Its been stated time and time again that Resources that don't have a certain attribute, count as 1000 in the final assembly of said characteristic. If what you are saying were true, it would be impossible to get a 45% crafting station because Inert gas is used as one of the materials in the microsensor suite, which has an experimentation category of conductivity... but we have some folks a heck of a lot smarter than I have already cracked the experimentation breakdown of crafting stations and discovered this to be true

I played an Architect at launch, and other architects took the statement you outlined above as THE OPPOSITE of what it really was... They were using lubricating oil in their schematics instead of polymer and finding out that their experimentation was significantly lower because they tried to "trick" the named resource percentages you have outlined above.

Bottom line is its not nearly as hard as people think...

SR/OQ = Armor effectiveness (based on gated max of named resource attributes)

MA/OQ = HAM

---

well you are absolutely free to disbelieve me, but what i said is true for crafting stimpacks and it is true for crafting blaster power handlers.

to say it simple:
if an experimentation category calls for a certain resource attribute (say 100% conductivity) and all used resources have conductivity, then the maximum experimentation is equal to the weighted average conductivity of all used resources.
but if some resources are missing conductivity, then the maximum experimentation is equal to the weighted average conductivity of all those resource that do have conductivity.
however if no resource has conductivity, then the maximum experimentation is equal to zero.

here are two references to posts saying just the same thing as i do:
ore mining unit
blaster power handler

---

BigAke wrote:

---

well you are absolutely free to disbelieve me, but what i said is true for crafting stimpacks and it is true for crafting blaster power handlers.

here are two references to posts saying just the same thing as i do:
ore mining unit
blaster power handler

---

Big Ake and Aildiin,

I must apologize... it looks as if you two are absolutely correct in your assesment /blush I had been using outdated information (I dropped architect in early December to pursue a degree in the holocrustodial arts)

What further muddled the argument from my perspective is that the discussion (on the proposed experimenation nerf) is taking place with a good number of people either 1) thinking the experimentation system still works as it did before publish 6 (the way I described) or 2) We will be returning to that method of experimentation...

Anyway good info, and thanks for pointing out my mistake.

Absolutely fascinating. This thread is getting floated for the time being

With regard to the weights given to various attributes when experimenting, there's a fairly detailed explanation of how I think it works in the Mathematics of Armorsmithing section in the Complete Guide. A few months ago I spent a fair amount of time figuring it out. I don't think the basic way the AWEQ is calculated has changed since then

(Although now that I think about it, I'm going to need to rewrite the experimentation section to take into account the new changes in crafting).

BigAke, that list you put together is great- one question- what attribute did you look to when ranking them? It sounded like you looked at the attributes as a whole. I'm really thinking that when you take each attribute individually (SR, Mall, etc), you're going to get different ranks- in other words, Duralloy might have the best SR, but Ditanium might have the best Mall. You suggested something like that at the end of your post, but I wasn't clear on how you cameup with the rankings you did.

---

JaatoWaals wrote:

BigAke, that list you put together is great- one question- what attribute did you look to when ranking them? It sounded like you looked at the attributes as a whole. I'm really thinking that when you take each attribute individually (SR, Mall, etc), you're going to get different ranks- in other words, Duralloy might have the best SR, but Ditanium might have the best Mall. You suggested something like that at the end of your post, but I wasn't clear on how you cameup with the rankings you did.

---

If I may BigAke,

Turns out, ALL of the attributes for the Best resources in each class have the highest ratings...

Meaning Duralloy Steel has the highest ceiling in Shock Resistance, Malleability, Conductivity, etc... of ALL steel.

So basically if you have 950+ overall quality of each ofthe #1 resources on BigAke's list, you'll never need another resource of this group unless you require a "named" resource.

I knew it seemed too cooincidental that all the great stuff selling on the Forum Trade boards was usually the same. Polysteel, Kammris, Bal'ta'ran...etc.... Good to know that was more than coincidence.

2. As to the resources and gates, if they just scale the gated ones in all the assembly, what is the point in having gated resources at all? I mean, if the gate is from 100-200, and you have a 150 resource, and they scale this, it averages out to a 500 right? Then, why have it gated, whynot just call it a 500 and be done? If they do end up using gates for each resource separately, it could get really complicated, cause a 200 MAL steel might be better on assemblythan a 400 one, if the 200 one was at the upper limit of ITS gate, while the 400 one was at it's lower limit. A better way would be to use the Highest of the Upper gates, and the lowest of the lower gates to figure out the average for that TYPE of material. thus for steel, which has a total gate (between the best stuff and the worst stuff) from between 0 and 800?, say, then at least we could call a spade a spade. Otherwise it would get really complex. Any ideas on whether gates are yet being used for assembly (not just 0-1000) and if they are, what way they are calculating.

I think it was done for appearance's sake- you know, you expect Copper to have a lower malleability than Iron, etc. I don't know how accurate all of their decisions were, but in general it has a logic behind it.

---

JaatoWaals wrote:
I think it was done for appearance's sake- you know, you expect Copper to have a lower malleability than Iron, etc. I don't know how accurate all of their decisions were, but in general it has a logic behind it.

---

Indeed, and it actually is one of the few systems that seems to have a very solid foundation. The great thing is if in the future they do indeed make multi line crafting viable, the resource system can be modulated to doso WITHOUT NERFING.

For instance.. lets say they do indeed make HAM experimentable down to 0 if utilizing all 10/12 experimentaton points... they can then raise the ceilings on the "lower level" resources in malleability...

Say Duralloy has max malleability of 600, then carbonitemax malleability woud be650, etc...

Its brilliant in its simplicity, but if only they are able to do the right thing

---

Shlo_mo_shun wrote:

Any ideas on whether gates are yet being used for assembly (not just 0-1000) and if they are, what way they are calculating.

---

Interesting. Are there bottom ends to the ranges as well?