Development Cycle Archive
Thread: Understanding the Crafting Experimentation Changes
What do you do with a schematic that calls for a resource which currently does not even carry that characteristic?
Currently that value defaults to 1, which under the new system, will only further gimp that product.
Chrysalide wrote:
Greetings everyone,
We are very aware that with the introduction of the modifications to the experimentation system in Publish Seven, quite a few questions have arisen and understandably so. The foremost and majority of these are curious as to why this change was implemented. We will do our best here to respond to your concerns, and to explain our reasoning behind moving forward with this change.
The driving force behind a change to a fundamental system of this magnitude is the current state of the game economy. To put not too fine a point on it, the game economy is in poor shape. There are a few factors that contribute to the detrimental condition of the economy, and we are reviewing and assessing them all. Of these factors, one of the most significant is the ability for many crafters to easily maximize the attributes of items and equipment through experimentation.
Our main concern centered around the fact that with most master crafters all making the best equipment possible, there is very little variety on the market. It seemed to us that there were almost no hard decisions to be made during the experimentation process by the crafter, and none to be made by the consumer when purchasing these items. When a majority of the equipment on the server is top of the line, there is very little reason for customers to seek out new sellers, and new vendors find it difficult to break into the business.
The primary goal of this change is two-fold. We want to take the first steps in rebuilding the economy, and we want to redefine the crafting game within Star Wars Galaxies. By having resource quality play a more significant role in the experimentation process, the focus should be shifting away from trying to make an item with maximum attributes and minimum encumbrance. We would like to encourage players to carefully choose where to spend their experimentation points, especially when using lower quality resources. For example, do you want to craft a faster weapon with higher damage but with heavier special move cost, or do you want a slower, less powerful weapon that is very easy to use? Do you want armor with higher resists and heavier encumbrance, or less protective armor that even the weakest person can use? Or do you want a general purpose item that is not especially strong in any area, but not weak in any area either? And after this, consumers will need to decide what types of equipment will best suit their playing styles.
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. Keep in mind that with this change comes a paradigm shift of sorts. We are aware that in most cases, items that will be crafted after Publish Seven will not have attributes as high as items created pre-publish. But still, I have seen some cases in which the heavier dependence on resource quality in this publish has resulted in items with higher attributes than are currently on Live.
One valid concern that has been raised with regards to this issue is that there are certain resources that are required for higher-end draft schematics that have capped qualities. For example, a certain item that has a dependency on conductivity might require Plumbum Iron as a resource component. The trouble with this being that ferrous metals, and specifically iron, will most always have poor conductivity (and realistically so). The perceived result of this is that any experimentation line that depends on conductivity can never be raised to an acceptable level. It is important to note that we are and have been aware of draft schematics like this. In such cases, we have artificially inflated the maximum values in the draft schematic for attributes that depend on the capped resources, so that the end result is in line with the expected values.
That may be a little confusing to follow so I will try to explain a little better with an example. Very simply, say that you have a weapon, and we want the maximum damage for that weapon to be no less than 50, and no greater than 100. Say that experimentation for maximum damage depends on conductivity, and the schematic requires iron and aluminum. For the sake of argument, let's say that the iron conductivity is capped at 10% of resource maximum, and aluminum conductivity is capped at 90% of resource maximum. When these two resources are used in crafting the item, the maximum conductivity possible is averaged out to be 50%. With this in mind, we have set the range of values for max damage on this weapon to be 50 to 200. The result of this is that with the maximum conductivity possible with these hypothetical capped resources (50%) the maximum damage that can be achieved with this weapon is what we wanted it to be (200 x 50% = 100). These artificially inflated values are not new in Publish Seven; these have been around since the launch of the game. In short, it is a valid concern, but it is one that we have always been aware of, and took steps to address in the original implementation.
In reviewing the threads on this forum regarding this new change, I have seen a lot of intelligent testing and discussion going on. More than a few people have mentioned that "if it isn't broken, we shouldn't fix it". The point as we see it though is that the current system is broken, and does need to be fixed. We feel that this is a change needed for the long-term health and enjoyment of the game, and we wanted to provide and frank and honest explanation of our reasons behind its implementation.
As always, we welcome and will happily address your comments and questions.
Most sincerely,
The reasoning behind the change is noble, but the change itself is severely flawed. I'd love to see more varied products, but most crafters have one line to experiment on that is much more important than any other line. Also, since crafters only cater to those with the most money, they're making products for people who are constantly buffed, so don't really care much about HAM costs, or armor encumbrance.
Yes, you've hit on the funtamental problem with the crafting system, they're all masters, all making the best stuff (and since its the same cost as stuff made by a less skilled crafter, they're doing it largely cheap).
I'm not sure why you see there as being no variety in what masters craft now, because that (at least with food and armour) is completely untrue. Weapons and BE tissues yes, but that problem is not related in any way to what you're doing now. That is a result of what you can experiment on, and what is worth experimenting on. If your experimentation changes both speed and damage of weapon, or to hit, or specials your choices are limited, durability, why bother with durability unless its a rare loot item, better to have higher dps guns and replace them more when they're cheap. BE tissues (and being a BE this is close to my heart) if you give us one line to experiment on, to change the one, or maybe two stats an item has I don't see where you're going with this. Armour and food both have wide varieties in them. Clothing, well, there's only so much you can do with clothing, regardless of how much you muck with the crafting system.
"The primary goal of this change is two-fold. We want to take the first steps in rebuilding the economy, and we want to redefine the crafting game within Star Wars Galaxies. By having resource quality play a more significant role in the experimentation process, the focus should be shifting away from trying to make an item with maximum attributes and minimum encumbrance. We would like to encourage players to carefully choose where to spend their experimentation points, especially when using lower quality resources. For example, do you want to craft a faster weapon with higher damage but with heavier special move cost, or do you want a slower, less powerful weapon that is very easy to use? Do you want armor with higher resists and heavier encumbrance, or less protective armor that even the weakest person can use? Or do you want a general purpose item that is not especially strong in any area, but not weak in any area either? And after this, consumers will need to decide what types of equipment will best suit their playing styles."
Um... you don't realize this happens now? Changing things to make it do what it already does seems counter productive. If you're aiming to accentuate these features ok I'll bite that could happen, but then you're going to just see slightly more skewed. The highest protection composite taking say 700, heck lets double that to 1400 in the new system (entirly for the sake of argument) to each stat encumbrance is still not changing things compared to a 2000 point buff, so you're not really altering things in a practical way other than to make them worse items. Making it harder for new people to start the game (which is the exact opposite of what you want to do). Food is the other example. Largely the things that can be adjusted with food (say with BE parts) make a tradeoff, so they are balanced, not equal as is, I'm not sure how that changes anything. Whether you get +208 stats for 60 minutes at 25 fill or +416 stat for 30 mins and 50 fill its net the same.
"
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. Keep in mind that with this change comes a paradigm shift of sorts."
I'm not sure where you're seeing a lack of competition, there's a lot of competition, except of course that guilds tend to stay loyal to one or two people and that sort of thing, this won't change that other than force the weakest one in the guild to quit. Competition now is purely resource dependent, it's more loot drops than mined resources, but that's to be expected. If you're making it MORE resource dependent then all you're doing is killing comptetition off who don't have the startup capital and massive stockpiles of potentialy good resources.
"We are aware that in most cases, items that will be crafted after Publish Seven will not have attributes as high as items created pre-publish. But still, I have seen some cases in which the heavier dependence on resource quality in this publish has resulted in items with higher attributes than are currently on Live.""
Yes, and given what has happened to factory crates in the past and what you're saying now you think this is potentially a good thing? A couple of days ago my friend (master weaponsmith) uncrated 40 odd crates of one type of gun to put in stock on his vendor, and there will be more on the way. Not that I much care from my end, because of this sort of change you'll see a massive stockpiling of weapons and armour before the patch, which is all around bad on your end, because you have to figure out how to store it all and not have the system get gummed up. All to solve a series of problems which don't appear to exist. Besides if you're willing to let that happen in terms of item storage (which you pretty much have to), I'd rather you give me 500 more spaces in my house, make items stack in lots of 1e6 rather than 1e5 than make these changes.
In short, the system is partially broken, you are attempting to fix the parts that work, while seeming to neglect the parts that don't. I don't see any of these changes as a particularly meaninful use of developer time (and certainly not right now), there are lots of changes crafting needs that aren't being done.
I like this change! Sure there are experimentation tapes that all the crafters that have millions of credits will be buying up to try to make their stuff the best, but these same people are going to gouge us for our credits as well. I'd rather find a decent crafter that will be selling their merchandise for a reasonable profit instead of the greedy players in this game. I wouldn't purchase a skill tape, crystal or pearl from anyone in this game either. Not everyone in the game can afford the rediculous ammounts these greedy players want for these items let alone all the essentials in the game. I'd like to see more skill tapes drop on npc's all over the place or quests for them like others have suggested. Maybe even a lower cap on experimentation so these players with all the tapes won't be the super best on the servers that they want to be and bring them in line with others easier.
I don't even like checking vendors anymore since most just offer the same stuff and all of them at prices too high for even the average player. Greed is killing this game. Someone had posted something about credit duping here. I've had my questions about that as well since so many players had so much to spend on all of these items that other players were gouging them for. Not everyone in the game can possibly make millions of credits like some of my guildmates by selling resources to the widely known crafters in the game since launch, etc. And missions while making enough for the planet hopping and some buying of needed items here and there is certainly not profitable enough to buy these crystals, etc. for the prices these greedy players are charging for them. It's apparently like winning the swg lottery when they find a crystal. Personaly if I find one I'll be keeping it for my eventual jedi character I've mastered 22 professions and counting chasing it down.
There's good and bad with every change I suppose though, but I like this more than dislike it. I like the fact the buffs will be steady and reliable as well. We'll be able to get consistent 2k buffs on all the stats if people get out and try to find some good materials to use. Let the changes begin!
As I see it, players will continue to look for highest damage and highest resists, and damn everything else, then complain about the HAM. If the new system can't alter this thought process, then the gun and armor market will arrive straight back to the place it is right now.
Example of player thought:
- This low damage gun with low HAM and high accuracy sucks
- This max damage gun with high HAM and low accuracy rocks
- This max damage gun kills me when I use it and I can't hit.
- The game is broke. Our specials kill us. We can't hit. The Devs need to fix us.
The reason that this matters is that end-game content is extremely deadly and has high resists. The reason that this matters is that PvP is dominated by heavily armored forces with high resists. The popular wisdom is that high damage matters more than everything else combined. I don't see this mindset changing.
VemaGara wrote:
I hope that this goes hand-in-hand with the combat changes. I really do.
As I see it, players will continue to look for highest damage and highest resists, and damn everything else, then complain about the HAM. If the new system can't alter this thought process, then the gun and armor market will arrive straight back to the place it is right now.
Example of player thought:
- This low damage gun with low HAM and high accuracy sucks
- This max damage gun with high HAM and low accuracy rocks
- This max damage gun kills me when I use it and I can't hit.
- The game is broke. Our specials kill us. We can't hit. The Devs need to fix us.
The reason that this matters is that end-game content is extremely deadly and has high resists. The reason that this matters is that PvP is dominated by heavily armored forces with high resists. The popular wisdom is that high damage matters more than everything else combined. I don't see this mindset changing.
with maximum attributes and minimum encumbrance. We would like to encourage players to carefully choose where to spend their experimentation points, especially when using lower quality resources. For example, do you want to craft a faster weapon with higher damage but with heavier special move cost, or do you want a slower, less powerful weapon that is very easy to use? Do you want armor with higher resists and heavier encumbrance, or less protective armor that even the weakest person can use? Or do you want a general purpose item that is not especially strong in any area, but not weak in any area either? And after this, consumers will need to decide what types of equipment will best suit their playing styles.
This reasoning is so incredibly non sequiter. One word: BUFFS. Few people care about HAM costs. Range Mods- specific to unique situations like status attacks, and with thedefence stackingbeing removed gets even more niche.Durability?Only important forhighly enhanced weapons. So how does this change help or force me to make more cogent decisions?
The way it works now, after I max out speed & damage, I use my extra points in range first, then maybe condition, then maybe HAM. Regardless however, I get more bang per pip for damage than I do for range. 3 pips in range MAY add another +1 or in HAM MAY reduce some or all HAM costs by 1. MAY. Comparitively speakling, you get a ludicrously low return per PIP for experimenting in any category outside of Damage.
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. Keep in mind that with this change comes a paradigm shift of sorts. We are aware that in most cases, items that will be crafted after Publish Seven will not have attributes as high as items created pre-publish. But still, I have seen some cases in which the heavier dependence on resource quality in this publish has resulted in items with higher attributes than are currently on Live.
Hopefully ... ? Most cases ... ? Some cases ... ? These are global fuzzies. Giveus hard, real numbers. And again, for weapons, very few people really care about any other attributes outside of speed & damage - why? Buffs, food, spice.
One valid concern that has been raised with regards to this issue is that there are certain resources that are required for higher-end draft schematics that have capped qualities. For example, a certain item that has a dependency on conductivity might require Plumbum Iron as a resource component. The trouble with this being that ferrous metals, and specifically iron, will most always have poor conductivity (and realistically so). The perceived result of this is that any experimentation line that depends on conductivity can never be raised to an acceptable level. It is important to note that we are and have been aware of draft schematics like this. In such cases, we have artificially inflated the maximum values in the draft schematic for attributes that depend on the capped resources, so that the end result is in line with the expected values.
/boggle ... First, if I wanted a game to be based in reality, well, Iprobably wouldn't play it. Games are entertainment, entertainment is anesthesia to themind. Second, you state you have inflated the maximumvalues - first this sounds like a temporary fix. Second, it's effect has not been borne out -weapons that depend oncapped resources still are suboptimal. You may as well cut the available weapons in a quarter and get it over with. There are two classes of weapons - grinding weapons that masters do notas a rule make in quantity and non-grinding weapons thatmasters make & focus on almost without exception. The Elite Carbine is a perfect example -the Laser Carbineis a far better choice any day.Scout Blasters have a better DPS than DX2's, making DX2's niche weapons (vs armored targets, or targets with Acid vuln). It seems that rather than nail crafting first with thischange, weapons need to bebalanced!
game. In short, it is a valid concern, but it is one that we have always been aware of, and took steps to address in the original implementation.
Again, not from what I see - and I've been crafting and tracking stats since live.
IMO, there's far more important items that need fixed, here's a short, random list:
- Experimentation on weapon stocks
- The broken 'bell curve' for assembly and experimentation and mastery
- I suspect that what I see as broken may be due to the higher complexity of weapon items vs food & other items - therefore I'm already starting out with a deck stacked against me.
- It's not readily apparent that food, assembly bonuses, crafting tool quality, crafting station quality and city bonuses have the impact they imply.
- The fact that any profession can repair anyitem with no readily apparent negative impact
- Further bolstered by the fact that there are no readily visible repair skills
- Weapon balancing - I'm getting tired of only making laser carbines & laser rifles (& T21's)
Where are the legions of new crafters that are calling for this change? I came up when Enott dominated Bugfin and along with him Caella, Blammo, Fury and a few others. They're all gone, I'm still here and doing fine. I've mentored and trained eight different weaponsmiths, three of whom are still around and weaponsmith and they're doing fine. Some of them sold sliced weapons, some of them sold highly enhanced weapons only, some of them made money selling resources. I've lived and thrived through credit dupes, item dupes, slicing exploits, vendor exploits, trade exploits, unserialized enhancement schematics (ok gray area there I guess).
My point is I've fought and struggled MORE against broken game mechanics and exploits, then I have against an imperfect system - and I've survied and I'm still here!!!
On a final note, I have to admit I'm a confused - to put it kindly. In the same post you imply the issue impacting the economy is that crafters are all too easily able to maximize attributes and this fix will help mitigate that and inject some life back into the game, then you turn around and state cases where attributes on most items are still at least as good as they were before, in some cases better. How does this then meet your requirements for a fix?
I hope I'm wrong on this - and if so I will post accordingly, but after months of positive changes and additions this one just isn't ringing true.
Luck.
Beforeeveryone starts stockpiling crated weapons/foods/armor keep in mind that you are probably being set up for another "accident/problem" with crated merchandise. Just like the FWG/Scatter crate "problem", you'll probably get hosed if you don't pull them from the crates and store them.
Overnight the devs can complete the process of removing the pre-nerf merchandise out of the universe in a snap. It will, of course, be another unexpected side-effect of a program change. **wink** **wink**. Then after the outcry from the player base, they will fix them but, magically, they will come out less powerful than before because they "just couldn't make it work correctly". This subterfuge is getting old.
The change to fix the economy by setting the bazaar cap at 6k was poorly thought out because all it did was raise the price of nearly everything. Locked containers which went for 3k before (too high even then) now go for 6k.
No doubt, another INTENDED side effect of this change will be that players will have a greater potential to be less protected in combat (armor/Dr. Buffs/food) and do less damage (weapons),making MOB's even stronger. Why do you hateungrouped or small groupplayers, or is it you just hate your customers???
atimes wrote:
You don't get it do you?
Ok, still not used to that silly tab key. Sorry about that.
Chrysalide, thank you for taking the time to explain some of the reasoning behind the planned changes to experimentation. People have made a lot of very important comments all throughout this thread, but I would like to concentrate on what I see as the main issue/problem with this adjustment from my point of view as a Master Armorsmith, Maser Weaponsmith, Master Doctor, and once Master Architect (yes, 2 accounts, for those adding up skill points! )
.... Of these factors, one of the most significant is the ability for many crafters to easily maximize the attributes of items and equipment through experimentation.
I'll agree that for crafters with the same number of skill points, nearly all items they create look largely the same. The only difference in today's market are the quality of materials one starts with (it caps the max attributes of the item).
It seemed to us that there were almost no hard decisions to be made during the experimentation process by the crafter, and none to be made by the consumer when purchasing these items.
Also agreed. Weaponsmiths shoot for damage experimentation only, armorsmiths aim largely for high resists, though there is a small market for low-HAM products. Doctors experiment for high value buffs, regardless of the duration bonus (you can always come back for another). Architects craft for BER.
the focus should be shifting away from trying to make an item with maximum attributes and minimum encumbrance. We would like to encourage players to carefully choose where to spend their experimentation points,
That'd be nice. I'd like a reason to want to make some different decisions. But right now, high damage, low speed weapons, or high resist armor, or big doctor buffs are the only things players want. This is due to the mechanics of the system - it does not appear to be a crafting issue.
For example, do you want to craft a faster weapon with higher damage but with heavier special move cost, or do you want a slower, less powerful weapon that is very easy to use? Do you want armor with higher resists and heavier encumbrance, or less protective armor that even the weakest person can use? Or do you want a general purpose item that is not especially strong in any area, but not weak in any area either?
Why? The decisions are currently no-brainers. I don't see that your explanation of the change being made will make players want high damage weapons any less, or make them prefer low-HAM over high resist armor, or prefer long duration buffs over high value buffs. Your change may modify the maximum available attributes, but it won't change the player preferences.
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.
I think you're right - that could happen, but only if your change is aimed at giving players a REASON for wanting the wider variety of attributes. Chrysalide, does this change do that? If so, could you focus an explanation or example on that?
I think I believe in what you're trying to accomplish. What I haven't seen yet is a credible explanation that the change on Test Center actually will accomplish your goals. It appears that the Test Center changes only adjust the maximum possible values on items, and also prevent most crafters from maxing out a particular attribute with points left over to try something different.
At least now, if I only take an attribute to 90%, I usually have a point or two left over, and I can determine whether I want lower HAM or electricity resists on my armor. With this change, it appears I will use all 10 points just to get the maximum value for base resists on all of my composite armor - leading to ALL of my armor now looking identical to every other 10-point armorsmith out there.
Am I seeing this wrongly? Any response would be greatly appreciated.
-Tamber Kelsain
Once and future Architect, Armorsmith, Weaponsmith, and Doctor.