Development Cycle Archive
Thread: Crafting Critical Failure Rates
Niacia wrote:
lorildeh wrote:
Manipulative wrote:
Also, if 5% of my experimentation is supposed to fail, and I experiment 10 times to create an item, that means 50% of the items I create should have a crit fail at some point during experimation. Obviously, I know I don't crit fail on 50% of the items I experiment on,
In this case, the chance for a crit fail is only 40.01% instead of 50%
Btw, if you do 100 experiments, the chance for a fail will be 99.4%, so that would be a bad idea.
Regards
Niacia
Of course, if you're experimenting each of your points individually, you really should take a long look at your crafting system. Most of the time, at least with crafting armor, I put in a max of 3 experiments, spending 4, 4 and 2 experiment points each ( if they each get great successes, otherwise, an amazing sucess will change that to 4,3,3, most likely, but a critical failure results in the item most likely just being destroyed, without finishing the experimentation process).
This means that each item has a 85.73% chance of not getting a critical failure (or a 14.27% chance of getting one), in the experimentation phase. Add the 5% chance of getting a critical failure in assembly, and you actually have an item that has a 18.55% chance of just going into my "destruction hopper."
Factor in the "good successes", the "moderate successes/failures" (which, btw, seem to be the same thing), and that number starts to increase to a point where we're talking about 25% of the items I craft are garbage.
This is fine when I'm making up my initial armor schematics for a large run, 'cause I tend to make an additional 2 suits or so of segments, etc. for the schematic creation, as far as resources go. But, it's still annoying to have to sit through making up a chestplate 6 times, because I keep getting any of the wide range of bad results (anything less than an amazing or great success might as well be a critical failure, when crafting up these schematics). However, with special Nightsister or Krayt components, you can instantly turn a 50k credit item (or more) into garbage by a bad die roll. Which is just no fun. The benefits of an amazing success on some of these items just do not counter-balance the risk of a critical failure.
If it's supposed to be a money sink, of sorts, then just give me an option to bump in 50% more of the raw materials/crafted components(loot items would still be required in the same amounts) in a "careful assembly" mode, which guarantees a great success (no more, no less), on each experimentation, and let me be done with it. When I want an amazing success, I'll risk the failures. This way, when I have some "uber loot" I can guarantee my customer that they'll actually get some armor back from me, and it won't be a piece of crap, 'cause I got a bad roll on an experimentation attempt.
Thunderheart wrote:
Vashner wrote:
Will removing fizzles unbalance SWG and it's economy? NO.. will it threaten people learing crafting professions NO. ...
Then why do we have it?
For the same reason there are critical fails in all games. There is a chance for critical fail and also critical successes. Its a great risk vs reward mechanic. Its game play. Without risk versus reward, there is no "game".
There isn't an RPG out there that doesnt include a chance for failure and "crit fails".
Just for the record, World of Warcraft has no critical failures in their tradeskills, why? People don't find them fun! It's horrible to spend all your hard earned money on vibro motors, krayt tissues, pearls, force crystals, etc...only to have a critical failure sending millions of credits down the toilet!
I have been a master weaponsmith since about August 2003, and have seen crit fail rates fluctuate wildly in the time between then and now. Some days I log on and cannot seem to craft anything, at other times I seem to be Weaponsmith to the Gods. I will say that your sample size is extremely small, and that I get normal crafting most days, it is just on those special days where like every 3rd item or experiment is a crit fail.
Also, if you are in charge of the crafting correspondence, the "moderate success" as it is called should be re-named to "moderate failure", it rarely if ever improves any stats, just worsens one and shifts some others. To me, that is not a moderate success. Either that, or make it moderately improve something, not disimprove my weapon.
And please look into the research center and the supposed bonus it gives crafters, some days it appears to work and other days not. I would like it to be stable in the on position rather than fluctuating day to day.
Sample a week worth of data from masters in all crafting professions and then run a statistics review of that data, not a tiny sample size. Remember, statistics can be used to say just about anything if you change the parameters, but if we are truly trying to fix this, then a large sample size from multiple professions should have a much bigger impact than a few thousand crafting attempts.
I'm sure losing a lot of resources is annoying, but losing hours ofreal lifetime is REALLY annoying when you lose a batch or two of Mutant Rancor DNA in a combine that CF"s.
Some days it takes me 4 or more hours to collect ten or so DNA samples of them and thats time sitting at the PC, not just waiting for a mine to collect stuff while your logged off....
Thunderheart wrote:
Gnomepunter wrote:
Yes, critical failures are fine and should be in a crafting system but, with Architects, you loose TONS of resources. 100 times more at one shot than every other crafter out there.
We Architects never asked to do away with them totally, just do away with loosing subcomponents on a final combine. We could deal with loosing the raw resources on a final combine but, to loose all those subcomponents that ALREADY PASSED is wrong.
Woulda car manufactuere throw away the whole car because the axle failedwhile makingit? You don't throw the entire car away, you replace the broken part.
On a crit failure, pick ONE of the pieces to fail and ONLY that piece fails. The crafter then replaces that ONE part (or resource) and continues on.
Stick with me guys, thats what Im saying.
First of all, its a good mechanic, but in this setting the risk and penalty have to be measured and thats whats being discussed...
I was using resources with 900+ on the stats that matter for that component.
I have a +42 crafting station and a 14.97 crafting tool.
This is way to many failures.
Alen Vondor
Radiant
Master Artisan
Master DE
Yesterday I spend 3 hours strictly crafting.
I was on a 43.xx station using a 14.xx tool. The city is a reasearch center.
I made 25 E11 Carbines, 20 Tangle pistols, 20 E11 Rifles, 10 Bowcasters, 5 Stocked T21's, 3 Krayt Power Handlers, and 2 Krayt Scatter pistols.
I have a total of 11 experiment points. So with the weapons that I made I have a total of 935 total experimentation.
I had 12 Critical failures on assembly 12/97 = 12.37% failure rate on 97 attempted crafts.
I had my first ever critical success on a tangle pistol, of thousands of crafts last night.
I had 2 amazing success assemblies, and the rest were great successes
I have 935 total experiment points.
Critical Failure Experimentation: 32 3.4%
Failure Experimentation 26 2.78%
Sumorex wrote:
Go gather some high level DNA (Mutant rancors) then crit fail. You'll see that an Architect's subcomponents isn't anything special.
if you only 47% of everything you try to make turns out right its kind of depressing - I mean, at master level we're supposed to be highly skilled crafters, the top of our field - and even with the best equipment we have only 47% chance of sucess?
Thunderheart wrote:
Gnomepunter wrote:
Yes, critical failures are fine and should be in a crafting system but, with Architects, you loose TONS of resources. 100 times more at one shot than every other crafter out there.
We Architects never asked to do away with them totally, just do away with loosing subcomponents on a final combine. We could deal with loosing the raw resources on a final combine but, to loose all those subcomponents that ALREADY PASSED is wrong.
Woulda car manufactuere throw away the whole car because the axle failedwhile makingit? You don't throw the entire car away, you replace the broken part.
On a crit failure, pick ONE of the pieces to fail and ONLY that piece fails. The crafter then replaces that ONE part (or resource) and continues on.
Stick with me guys, thats what Im saying.
First of all, its a good mechanic, but in this setting the risk and penalty have to be measured and thats whats being discussed...
Whats needed are a few things:
- Clear benefits to using quality tools / craftstations. This is the Star Wars, its the future, high technology, a master craftsperson is a master at using/understanding their equipment and materials. There is no in game reason to keep players, 'In the Dark' about how their tools / craftstations effect their profession.
- The risk bar for experimentation needs to mean something. If the risk bar says 0% risk, then that is exactly what the craftperson should have, 0% risk, if it says 5%, then fine, its 5%. But please make the risk bar MEAN something.
- For a master craftperson,he or she should have*MORE* critical successes than critical failures.
With the current death / decay systems, there really is no reason to have all of this critical failure stuff.
- Pahbi