Development Cycle Archive

Ooops, I was wrong on the station, The crafting station I've primarily been workign with is a Food & Chem rated at -22.85.

I'm using 3 tools, --1.61, -9.31 and 13.62.

All crafting for me is done at +50 Med Assembly and Experimentation.

Quality of resources, of course, varies depending on what we have.

I'm doing most all of the med stuff I can craft, so the schematics also vary, but more components are being crafted by me than anything else (of course, since those need to go into the final meds, usualy.)

I will experiment usually 1 box at a time. I sometimes do more, however, up and including all 5 of my EPs at once. So there is definite variance.

All of that info is strictly what I, the Medic Correspondent, have been crafting in the lab. Others are doing their own things as well, but as I mentioned most of them are likely crafting at +100 Assembly and Experimentation skill in their respective fields.

I would suggest that the variables being used here are otherwise pretty well varied. From crafting from great OQ & Mal resources (both known to affect failure rates) to crafting from really poor OQ & Mal resources. I would just conisder the variables all over the place on most of that stuff. I think the other stations in the Lab are probably all around the -20 range, though, so that is a semi-constant for those Correspondents who put in time testing there. They may be crafting at their own stations, though, so it;s hard to say.

Any folks using the tools that were in the lab are using stuff likely around the +13 range.

Of note is that while "The Lab" is a building, the script that this information comes from is actually associated onto our characters, so it does not matter where we craft or what we craft or anything, it's always logging the info.

Thank you for looking into this issue!

I believe a flat out # attempts vs crit fails tracking is probably not sufficient to get at the problem. For a Novice crafter, 4% crit fails might be just about right or maybe even pretty good. For a Master it is humiliating. As others have pointed out, the crit fails seem to happen in clusters, 3 or 4 in a row sometimes. Maybe it's just probability and a person's tendency to remember the extreme results, but maybe it's a flaw in your randomizer.

In any case, I'd be curious to know what the developers feel the proper ranges *should be*?

For example, what should the crit fail rate be for:

Novice Artisan with +0 crafting tool.

Master Artisan with +0 crafting tool.

Master Artisan with +10 crafting tool

Master Artisan with +10 crafting tool, +25 crafting station

Master Artisan with +15 crafting tool, +40 crafting station

Master Artisan with +15 crafting tool, +40 crafting station, in a Manufacturing / Research Center

4.49% is still a bit high for a Master.

Why not give Masters a break? Lower that rate by half for Masters.

Asa bio-engineer, myself and a lot of my fellow professionals are seeing much higher critical fail rates than these AND harsher penalties for those critical fails.

During experimentation;

All our experimentations are done on a paired stat - 2 numbers being increased at the same time. A critical fail on either stat drops that stat AND another stat not in the pair being experimented on. E.g a failure on Psychology drops Dependibility (from the Psychology pair being experimented on) AND drops Cleverness (from the Mental pairnot being experimented on). This lowers the potential maximum for both stats.

Now, given your own test data critical failure rate of 4.2%, this means that a Master BE has less than a 40% chance of completing ONE creature withoutone critical fail - I simply cannot believe this is as intended. Particularly with the double hit we get on stats with any fail.

However - I personally could probably deal withrelatively high levels of failure if, once the template was made, we didn't have a chance of critical failing the final creature construction and losing potentially hours of personal time in both crafting and resource gathering on one single die roll that certainely seems to be a lot worse than 4.2%.

For me, asa BE, 2 adjustments must be made to avoid 'keyboard breaking frustration' that happens far too often;

• Stop reducing a second, unrelated, stat on a crit fail in experimenting on a pair


• Eliminate the critical fail chance of the final creature creation once the template is made

---

Chrysalide wrote:

Assembly attempts: 1448
Assembly critical failures: 65
Assembly critical failure rate: 4.49%

Experimentation attempts: 1284
Experimentation critical failures: 54
Experimentation critical failure rate: 4.21%

---

Ok now lets see the stats on how many "moderate sucesses" you got whilst experimenting! I am a MWS and I cannot make a weapon with just one of these in the experimentation stage! A "good success" is marginal at best but realistically anything less that all "great successes" is garbage and ends up being destroyed! Maybe some clarification on what is meant by moderate and the rest etc as I fail to see why any success makes a weapon worse than it already is/was! One moderate success means that typically you cannot recover the item to be salable

I could honestly give 2 hoots about crits as they happen rarely to me like your stats suggest sure they are annoying but I can live with those when they happen (I have yet to try using enhancers tho, so I can't say wether or not they effect the critical aspect). I understand it is fustrating for architects and the like but they use so much more resources.

---

MasterNerfSlayer wrote:
Using a rating 9 tool (not the best I know) in front of a 40 rating crafting station when vehicles came out, I crit failed on my first 2 attempts at making vehicles. I dunno what kinds of testing you're doing, but it doesn't match player experience. My tools werent the best, but there is no way I should crit fail twice in a row with even half decent tools. I have experienced many more crit fails since and have since dropped artisan.

---