Development Cycle Archive
Thread: Understanding the Crafting Experimentation Changes
ArusSaab
Sat Mar 13, 2004 5:01 pm
#430
Dear Devs,
Here's one more thing to consider, it's probably been addressed already but just in case:
With this system, you are OFFICIALLY making any NON-MASTER crafting level a GRIND ONLY BOX.
There will be NO reason to even TRY and sell items unless:
- The item has no experimentation, or
- You are a master in the craft.
MrHackenslash
Sat Mar 13, 2004 5:29 pm
#431
I agree 100% devs.
The lack of choices when selecting an item always troubled me. Shopping just becomes a search for the cheapest price, there is almost never a reason to look at the damage output or HAM costs.
Seshemw
Sat Mar 13, 2004 5:34 pm
#432
One thing this change has finally brought to light is just WHY they can't just shift resoures from one thing to another.
One of the arguments was always 'Ok, this uses X Iron, which never has conductivity above 100, and accounts for 90% of the schematic, thus the weapons such ass. Why not change it to copper?'. The answer is that the weapon doesn't suck ass, it's in line with what they wanted (which is really spooky with how craptastic the numbers are on some of these, at least until publish 8). That internal to the schematic and invisible to us is a x90 modification (or some arbitrary number based on the average stat of the resource compared to the numbers they intended to get out of us) on the slots, so if you changed it to something with better numbers you'd totally throw the numbers out of whack in a big way.
Which makes me wonder why it was done in the FIRST place, since it adds needless levels of complication (instead of having a unified crafting system with predictable results, invisible modifiers were placed situationally making global changes IMPOSSIBLE since they'd have to find and retune each individual schematic... so they never make changes).
But it does make some sense now, in a backhanded way. I sincerely hope the revisions to weapon stats would make a body want an advanced weapon over a 'lowly' laser carbine, say, without utterly wrecking our ability to fight and survive in the game.
One of the arguments was always 'Ok, this uses X Iron, which never has conductivity above 100, and accounts for 90% of the schematic, thus the weapons such ass. Why not change it to copper?'. The answer is that the weapon doesn't suck ass, it's in line with what they wanted (which is really spooky with how craptastic the numbers are on some of these, at least until publish 8). That internal to the schematic and invisible to us is a x90 modification (or some arbitrary number based on the average stat of the resource compared to the numbers they intended to get out of us) on the slots, so if you changed it to something with better numbers you'd totally throw the numbers out of whack in a big way.
Which makes me wonder why it was done in the FIRST place, since it adds needless levels of complication (instead of having a unified crafting system with predictable results, invisible modifiers were placed situationally making global changes IMPOSSIBLE since they'd have to find and retune each individual schematic... so they never make changes).
But it does make some sense now, in a backhanded way. I sincerely hope the revisions to weapon stats would make a body want an advanced weapon over a 'lowly' laser carbine, say, without utterly wrecking our ability to fight and survive in the game.
darknacht
Sat Mar 13, 2004 5:39 pm
#433
The "I feel your pain" reply is well-intentioned I am sure, but it does nothing to help matters from our perspective. This patch started to be one of the first I actually thought would have a net positive effect. The crafting change, if it goes on as planned, will be yet another blunder in a long series of experimental 'brainflatulencia'.
Nobada
Sat Mar 13, 2004 5:50 pm
#434
[quote]
We believe that the introduction of items with a wider variety of attributes will be a step leading to the leveling of
We believe that the introduction of items with a wider variety of attributes will be a step leading to the leveling of
the playing field between crafters. And hopefully, this will lead to an increase in competition between crafters.
[end quote]
[end quote]
The problem is this is flawed thinking for a number of reasons.
First, why should the playing field be level? I cannot go out and make my own video game on the same level as Star Wars
Galaxies. Why? Because I don't have the money to hire a staff capable of producing something in the same scope, and
even if I could, I couldn't single handedly support it well enough to keep any players (customers) happy.
Playing fields, in a capitalistic society, are not and should not be level.
In fact, a better way to "fix the economy" if you believe that it's broken, would be to UN-level the playing field more
than it is right now. The problem isn't that it's too hard for people to break into professions...indeed it happens all
the time. The problem is actually that there's almost nothing that differentiates one crafter from another.
The reasons for this are obvious. We all have the same skill cap. We all have the same number of experimentation
points. We all have access to the same resources. There's no variation.
And unlike in the real world, brand means nothing in this game because, not being a real society, ultimately nothing
matters. You can't have a designer dress or a one-of a kind speeder made by a crafter who has access to technology and
design that nobody else has. And most people don't role play (in the textbook sense) enough to talk about their new XYZ
Speeder at a party the way they would about their new car in real life.
So brand loyalty doesn't exist, except for factors relating to personality.
I've had many people tell me I'm their favorite armorsmith. I'm sure there are armorsmiths out there with 12
experimentation points instead of my 10 (I haven't spend the millions of dollars to get a couple +10 Armor
Experimentation tapes) who can make armor with better stats. And I'm sure there are armorsmiths out there who charge
less than I do. But I try very hard to make sure I have no unsatisfied customers. And up until recently, I've worked
hard to fill custom orders quickly, and whenever I make anything, I only use whatever the best materials are that I've
got at the time of production. Any piece that doesn't come out with at least all "Great" experimentation gets tossed or
sold at "clearance" prices.
But personality and familiarity are about the only things people are loyal to in SWG. And even those only go so
far...some of my guildmates buy armor from smiths with 12 points...I can't blame them since they get resists as high as
mine, but with lower HAM costs. Of course, they pay a million credits per suit for that, but they got something
"better" for their money.
So here are some ideas for un-leveling the playing field to make things more interesting.
Unique Item schematics. Obviously these need to be designed by SOE but they are UNIQUE. This means that there's only
one. Period. It might be for something really amazing or it might be for something fairly mundane. Either way, whoever
finds it and uses it has a unique product. This may be, in my case, a Master Armorsmith or it may be a young Armorsmith
just starting out. Unique item schematics help not only to distinguish one crafter from others, but it can also keep
the marketplace fresh because as new schematics are found and used and their products sold, it brings focus to new
merchants. One important factor to this idea is that Unique Item Schematics should come from a variety of sources. For
instance, many crafters don't like to engage in combat often, if at all, because their dedication to their craft has
forced them to give up combat or medic skills to the point where they are simply useless in combat situations. So
"rescue" or "escort" type missions should also sometimes yield unique item schematics. Or perhaps they could even come
from random NPCs who happen to be camping out in the middle of nowhere, and only granted to a player after following a
particular conversation path. If the NPC doesn't like how the conversation goes, nothing will happen other than that
the player had a short and sweet conversation with a random NPC. But if the NPC likes the conversation, (s)he tells the
player (s)he enjoyed the chat, and hey, here's this thing I invented (or found). Maybe you can do something with it.
You get the idea. This also makes the world more interesting, because it incents players to interact with the
environment more often. Finally, unique items schematics should NOT be announced by SOE! Part of the fun of games like
this SHOULD be in discovery. Currently, there's very little discovery in SWG.
Unique Resources. Basically, it's kind of goofy that you can whip out a survey tool and know exactly what resources
exist on the entire planet. So you introduce "hidden" resources. These might be unique to a planet for a week or so or
unique to just one particular spot on a planet. But the fun part is that they don't show up on your survey tool unless
you happen to look at the survey tool within a certain concentration of the resource (say 50% just for the sake of
discussion). As with unique items, unique resources might be great or they might be lame, but they're unique in that
not everybody in the world will know they exist and therefore, everybody in the galaxy to whom that resource might be
important or valuable won't be looking for it.
Advertising. This is something many people have been asking for for a long time. I'm not claiming to have an answer to
this one, but some type of advertising needs to be implemented. Simply having a vendor registered on the planetary map
is pretty much useless. All it tells somebody is that you have a certain level of merchant skills. It doesn't tell
anybody how many items are on your vendor, if they're any good, etc. So something smart and fun needs to be done with
advertising, again, to differentiate or at least be able to draw attention to different crafters.
Searching. Why the bazaar doesn't have a search field is beyond me. And it's also ridiculous that here on earth we can
find anything anywhere on eBay, but I can't do a search just for "cargo pocket" and limit my search to that. Wouldn't
that actually be passing less data back and forth between me and the server than a listing of all General Item listings
for the entire Galaxy?
The reason I bring up Advertising and Searching is that if used together intelligently, I think they could also create
a better economy. If you can search on a keyword, and crafters can advertise, you're more likely to create awareness of
crafters who, just like in real life, put more into their craft (by taking the time to advertise their product
effectively) than those who don't.
Maybe something that could be done is to allow items listed on private vendors to be advertised on the bazaar for an
extra fee. It would also help if items listed on vendors in player cities show the player city name instead of the SWG
planetary region name. Again, this helps differentiate and makes the player city more realistic / valuable in that
sense.
KzinKiller
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:07 pm
#435
I'm not competent to comment on the true effect of these changes on master crafters, so I'll just take the word of every single master crafter in our City as they examine these changes: bad idea, really poorly conceived.
But as a former merchant and somebody who has patiently accumulated millions of credits through resource sales to crafters, I do feel competent to speak to the supposed justification for this change as a way of helping the troubled player economy -- you must be kidding. This is like trying to fix the smoking ruins of the Hindenburg by dumping a Dixie cup of tapwater on the ashes.
You know what has done the single greatest damage to the player economy? Decisions like this. Decisions out of touch with the way players play, the things they want to do, the things that clearly don't work. "Breaking" crafting (this is definitely how Master WS's and AS's see it) while so much else is dysfunctional is not progress ... just another misguided step toward the precipice.
CaLVines
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:27 pm
#436
And I'll quote this again, since this is exactly the non-emotional, logical, excellent post that the devs have asked for. Now if they only would read and understand...
Arrya wrote:
I'd just like to reiterate the following post again in case it was missed. While I agree with what the devs say they are trying to accomplish, I believe these changes will just make things worse.
Vercin_getorix wrote:I thought long and hard about posting a response. I do not think I will be heard in the cacophony of replies. In the end, here I am. I figured the best way to approach this is to go line by line:"To put not too fine a point on it, the game economy is in poor shape."This doesn't mean anything. I realize that you went on to ellaborate somewhat, but you did not strike home. What would be helpful is if you put your concerns in language that has meaning. "poor shape" means lots of different things to lots of different people. The result is that the statement becomes meaningless.My temptation is to espouse ecomonic philosophy that will roll off of everyones back. I will spare you. What would help me is to frame your discussion in economic terms. That is, if you view the failed economy in terms of unemployment, hyperinflation, stagnation, etc. Once you frame the discussion, then we can rationally talk about it."Our main concern centered around the fact that with most master crafters all making the best equipment possible"Your expectation SHOULD be that crafters make the best equipment possible. That being said, I could not disagree with you more. Most master crafters make garbage. Every server I have anything to do with has its elite crafers, and they rank in the 1 to 2 dozen. Typically, I see about 3-4 elite Weaponsmiths per server at any given time.Your problem -may- be that 4 Master Weaponsmiths can easily meet the demand of weapons on a server. This is a different problem than you are adressing."there is very little variety on the market"Perhaps. But the question is if this is because of the system, or because of the market. Based on my personal first hand experience as a weaponsmith, it is because of the market. Ask any Weaponsmith. 90% of the customers only look at Damage and Speed. Nothing else matters to them. Adding complexity to the product will not change this. If you change the combat system to depend on something more that speed and damage, this could change."new vendors find it difficult to break into the business"This is as is should be. It is unreasonable to think you will start a retail sales business, and immeditately be competetive with Walmart. This just doesn't happen. It takes time and a lot of hard work to make a successful business. You can lay this at the feet of the current crafting system if you wish, but it is misplaced. Establish manufacturers will always have an edge in a mature market. Only innovators have an edge on the establishment, and I do not see how your new system allows for true innovation."We want to take the first steps in rebuilding the economy."Despite the rhetoric of the current US Presidential campaigns, governments cannot rebuild economies. Only the consumers can. You might not think of yourself as such, but you are a de facto Oligarchy in this game."By having resource quality play a more significant role in the experimentation process"Not to rub it in, but you first say you want to help the new crafters, yet you change the system to the advantage of those that already have the best resources, ie. the established crafters."especially when using lower quality resources"On balance, lower quality materials will always make lower quality merchandise. All things being equal, consumers will usually purchase higher quality goods and services if they can afford it. Convience is the big exception to this rule, but I digress."consumers will need to decide what types of equipment will best suit their playing styles"You nailed it, and didn't even know it. There is little diversity in the market place, because there is little diversity in playing styles. Now we can wax philisophical about why this is. We can discuss "chicken and egg" problems of game design. But, we are not doing that. That would help us understand your changes."We believe that the introduction..."This may be nitpicking, but please please please stop using language that reflect insecurity in your decisions, like "we hope", "we would like", and "we think". You are in control. You make the decisions. If you seem uncertain about the current course of action, then you are generating fear and trepidation in the player base. Much of the rancor in this dicussion is fueled by your unsure language. You may not be sure about your course of action, but don't tell us.Lastly JustG wrote: "I would ask that you try to keep the emotional responses out of it... that has no effect other than to make us skip that post."People are emotional because they care. To openly say that you dismiss peoples feelings outright serves to really freaking tick people off. You cannot with a wave of your hand invalidate peoples feelings. People have feelings for a reason.I said this before, and I really want you to listen. Your are the de facto governement in this system. There are few greater mistakes politicians can make than to discount peoples feelings. They will punish you mercilessly for doing it. The developement team may not be elected, but players can certainly vote with their credit cards.Just in summary, I strongly urge the team to not move on this change. You have a problem you are trying to solve. That problem has not been clearly defined. No metrics have been put forth to illustrate the problem. You have not convinced large portions of the player base that there is a problem, most notably the successful master crafters and the people that have been playing the longest, ie. your most loyal and most influential players. You have not put forth any evidence that the your changes will actually work to fix the problem as you see it. All the discussion of effects is rife with speculation.So, in finish, you are taking a HUGE risk in going forward with these changes. Are you prepared to move forward with this, against the will of the people, on a hunch?
JCatano
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:30 pm
#437
TroThorns wrote:
Gamespy. They said that swg had leveled at around 100k subscribers.
JCatano wrote:
Just for kicks and a little, well....we'll get to that after your next post:
Where did this "less than 100k" come from?
MMORPGs are all about change. This is not something new. Thoughts of Armageddon isn't new, either.
Anyway, you gave me nothing to refute, because the change hasn't even gone live, yet. Everyone is screaming at something that isn't there at this time.
Feel free to try and come to a conclusionabout somethingwhich hasn't been implemented.
Heh...
Yes, the holy grail ofgame information.Especially, in regards to particular information (subscriptions)that isn't normally given out by anyMMORPG company, unless they hit milestones. I guarantee that number was made up, just as the other poster'sstatistics were.
In reference to someone else's point about canceled accounts.....
That is the nature of a MMO. They normally start very strong and tail off sharply after 6 months or so. Then, it may slowly increase or decrease, until an expansion comes out, which pulls the numbers back up. You will see the same exact thing happen with the Space Expansion.
Gunsablazen
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:37 pm
#438
OMG hahaha all I can say.
Wynn or whomever made that post belowis right. He will make hundreds of scem's as many as his resourses allow and the new crafter is toast. He most likely has enough resoures to last months with out making another scematic. I know on my server there are a few smiths who are thinking the same as Wynn. Are you going to nerf the scematic's folks make before patch. I would hope so if this crafter patch is for game balance. <Sorry gang> But fare is fare.
I am a new MA and have a good product finally and a growing client base.I just made my first 2.5 mill.and I dont see your point in making changes. I am on Sunrunner and we have a couple uber MA's who charge huge amounts of money for there product and do well. I fear no compition from them since like any good smith will always harvest the finest resources and have just as good as armor as they. Maybe not now but soon !! If this patch means my armor is gunna be crap I hate to say it but I might as well be a MD/MTK like evryone else. Or move on to a new game coming soon to a theater near you. X2 accounts.
If your thoughts are the new guy having a chance in the market place I believe everyone should have 1 vendor able to be on planetary map for all to find. And maybe just revamp the bazaar/vendor system so folks can see all Items for sale on planet !! Then tarvel and buy rather travel to a empty vendor.
I have to say again. I have made alot of cash and I am a new smith. SoI do not seeyour point to the crafting nerf. Seems balanced to me. I just don't get it. Maybe someone can tell me what that thread means =)
Also I just pulled 300 pieces of 80% kinetic armor off vendor till after patch so I can charge 1 million cr for a pair of failed experiment crappy comp gloves.
Show me the money.
Gunzablazen MBHand La'Toole MA/MArt/MCH
Sunrunner
DimiGR
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:38 pm
#439
I have no probs with the changes if the they go for all pre- and after publish 7 items
CPark
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:45 pm
#440
I posted a crafting scheme that received good reviews (but no comments, even though I asked for them ) in two of the crafting forums. I believe it meets your goals, addresses many player concerns about new crafters' entry into the game and about visibility into the system. Beyond that, it may well be possible to fit it into the existing system relatively easily -- if not now, perhaps in the future.
For what it's worth -- its at...
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=artisan&message.id=33034
I hope it is of some help.
) in two of the crafting forums. I believe it meets your goals, addresses many player concerns about new crafters' entry into the game and about visibility into the system. Beyond that, it may well be possible to fit it into the existing system relatively easily -- if not now, perhaps in the future.For what it's worth -- its at...
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=artisan&message.id=33034
I hope it is of some help.
Pirassi
Sat Mar 13, 2004 6:50 pm
#441
This change would be very very very very bad for the game. Im going to keep it short and simple. It works , dont break it !!!! SOE this is a nerf that has the potential to break the game completely. The problem with the economy is not a lack of variety , its people putting things on sale for insane amounts of credits and people actually buying them. People run missions all day ( or days) to buy the overpriced item, whereas if the item was reasonably priced to begin with , we wouldnt have this economic problem we have now.
Hedek
Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:03 pm
#442
I'm just curious, are the persons who designed the craft system in the first place the same that are making these changes or are they working on the Space Expansion now ?
Or is the Space expansion not using a separate team ?
I always felt crafting (along with graphics) were the 2 most successful things in SWG. Whereas combat and especially balance between professions are the worst. And it always seemed logical to me that you'd address combat before even bothering with crafting or even doctor buffs before combat...
So I started to wonder, trying to figure out what was your twisted logic :and I think I found an answer, old crafters will either stock up a lot of items before the patch. Once this done they'll be bored and feel like they have nothing else to do and will end up dropping their crafting profession. This will result in helping young crafters who will have lost their older competitors, providing the trend took was long enough for the pre-patch stocks to be sold out so that these new crafters can sell anything again.
Anyway those who don't cancel will adapt, accept and end up forgetting how it was before. I doubt SOE would withdraw this change now that I have finished developing it, now thatthey have already wasted their time on, not to mention it would furthermore make them look ridiculous "we plan to do something and end up not doing it because players said they don't like it". Just like you "tweaked" the Imperial Crackdown (wow what a nice name) down to something so unnoticeable : I still can't believe you spent at least a whole publish cycle to develop it. Pathetic.