Doctor Archive

Zarlor, I respectfully disagree with you on some of your points. I will agree that what you've stated is probably how it is supposed to work, but it's not what i've seen (personally)... now, here is my disclaimer: i have not crafted an item in at least 10 days... been busy IRL so i haven't been playing much, and the only thing I combine by hand are buffs, so this is what was used in this test. For what it's worth, this is a repost of something I posted on my server board a couple weeks ago:

==========

...

Maybe it's just my imagination, but I seem to crit a LOT more with one of these than I used to. I'm a Doc and I'm not sure if our experimentation works differently (wouldn't surprise me) but here's what I saw last nite... Granted, I changed 2 variables (station and tool) but that shouldn't make it worse, that should make it better.

OLD TOOLS:

+4 station

-7 tool

Critical failure during experimentation 1:20 (1 out of every 20 attempts)

Buff max on test item: 755

NEW TOOLS:

+42 station

+14.94 tool

Critical failure during experimentation 1:8 (1 out of every 8 attempts)

Buff max on test item: 757

So, for doctors, anyway, I'm not sure if it helps or not. RIght now, I'd say not. The resources/components used for the tests above were identical. It COULD be that the tools/station help reduce the chance of failure on the final combines (as opposed to experimentation); I can't speak to that, as I wasn't measuring for it. But my experimentation crits went up considerably! On buffs, this makes a huge difference; one crit failure during experimentation makes the max buff 500-600, tops, so ~25% reduction.

===================

The general consensus on the server board was that a + station and a - tool netted the best results (at the time I was testing for this)... I'm 100% convinced this is a bug and that + tools should be better (and for all I know, this has been fixed in the past 10 days or so, becase like I said, I haven't tried it since). The components used in the test above were identical, and whilei created a small sample size for testing (40 items per station/tool combo), it definitely showed a trend. All other techniques (number of experimentation points used at a time, etc.) were the same between tests.

Emmy

No, I didn't. Like I said at the top, I know I violated a fundamental rule of scientific experimentation by changing 2 variables at once, but honestly I wasn't expecting my results to be worse with the 'better' equipment.

What I was actually doing at the start was benchmarking what I was currently producing, because I expected to be blown away by the better results. Naturally, I was supremely disappointed!

Sadly, I can't even repro the experiment, because in my excitement for the new tools, I destroyed the old ones. At the time, it seemed like a brilliant space-saving maneuver (ha-ha). I did my benchmark tests, blew up those tools, deployed the new ones (I was so proud!) and tried again. (insert quote about hindsight here...)

Mostly, I wanted toair my results for the original poster, so that s/he could perhaps exercise better judgement than I did when it's time to blow up the tools, and instead, maybe do a little better testing to see what works best for him/her.

If I got the part needed from a DE for a station, I'd make a new set and try again (my architect resources are sopoor that I have no doubts that I can reproduce a similarly crappy set of tools as my original). As it stands right now, I"m on walkabout on Lok and not near home to test these things...

Emmy

I just noticed a post on the Artisan forums (I don't normally go over ther) that confirmed they are seeing that -tools are apparently functioning better than +tools. Very interesting. Gott be a bug, mind you, but interesting nonetheless.

Hmm, interesting. I'm somewhat relieved to be honest (didn't want to be the only one experiencing these types of results). I can easily remake my f/c tool and referring to my supply of architect materials, I'm overcome by shoddy quality resources, so a - tool should be easy!

Thanks for the research, Zarlor

Emmy

I use a 14.97 tool and a 42.9 crafting station. I have a crit failure every once in a blue moon but everything else is either a great or amazing success.

I'm currently using 12.9 I got someone to craft for me in exchange for some resources as tip (she needed new tools too) .that's using 930 conductivity copper. but i am homeless so i use a pesci droid where i usually get great successs but numerous critical fails.

but i think crafting station goes upto 45 they have a discussion about it on architect forum they used extreamly high quality stuff and got about 44.5 or something .

OK, here we go. This is what I've found:

Crafting tools go from -15 to +15, as we know. +14.94 tools are a dime a dozen on the bazaars, or can be made by any master artisan, if he knows what materials to use.

Crafting stations go up to +45, but the max I've seen is +43. Mine is +42.56, and I'm satisfied with that.

The quality of these items help you have less critical failures, but don't necessarily help you in experimentation as much as you would think. The amount of experimentation points that you have increase your success rates.

The Potential Energy in organics, and Mallaebility in the inorganics, logically the higher the better in these, give you better experimentation, thus coming out with better quality items at the beginning of experimentation.

With all these factors combined, good quality tools and private stations, many experimentation points, and high PE and MA resources, these will give you the best product.

That said, in true SWG style, when you need it made well, and have limited resources, a critical failure is guaranteed!!

-Mogroz
soon to be Master Combat Medic, contemplating Doctor.