Doctor Archive

Can anyone explain to me howa ZERO per cent chance of failure actually equates to about a 25% chance of critical failures ??

When experimenting on buff packs, I have about 10 charges to use, each one says 0% chance of failure, even when using 3-4 charges, yet I would say a quarter of the time I get failures or crits rendering the pack useless, to the point of having to try each pack 2 or 3 times to get a usable pack, how is this even remotely a ZERO per cent chance of failure ?

Am I the only person to get this ?

Thats the NEW math of the empire.

Maybe it's classing Failure and Critical Failure as 2 seperate things?
May be a bug, I've noticed recently that the chance of failure % is oftem 0 when I know **edit** well it isn't supposed to be with the crafting tools I'm using.

All I know is it's bloody irritating, either fix the formula so a 0% chance equates to a ZERO % chance, i.e. it's not possible, or fix the bloody risk meter so I know the risk of trying what I'm currently trying.

I'm Master Doctor btw (I just tend to wear the tag "BattleMaster" most of the time because I'm tired of getting bugged for buffs constantly )

Because that 0% is not a chance at failure at all. It's just a difficulty rating. 0$ difficulty does not preclude a chance of failure, it only means there is a reduced chance, but every action in the game always has a chance at failure.

That being said, it is on the issues list as something that most folks seem to think is more than a little misleading.

The red meter at the side says "Risk" at the top, if the risk meter says 0%, what am I supposed to think ?

Is it a 0% risk that my component will sprout wings and fly away ?

I'm sure I didn't have these levels of error before, it's only in the past couple weeks that it's shot up.

Bear in mind I'm talking experimentation here, not failure at the construction stage - there's no risk meter on that score.

I know what you're talking about. And, as I said, it's listed as an issue.

But the basic concept of the game is that all action carry a level of risk. Nothing is 100% guaranteed in this respect. I have been told that modifying how that percentage is determined to always show more than 0% (and remember also that the system does round, so even if it would say something like .49% you'd still see 0%) would be very difficult. So I don't expect it's a high priority item for the Devs.

Well I appreciate your response to what was admittedly a very heated post, it just grates really badly to be told you have a 0% chance of failure and then screw up 3 buff packs on the trot.

Rounding numbers btwis not a major problem code-wise, you add .5 to the number and drop the fractional part

Even if you're rounding up, just add 1% to the number and drop the fraction, that way you'll always have a 1% chance of failure, but even so, that's 1 in 100 chance, I'm screwing up 25% of the time, this isn't even close.

I can appreciate the furswtration, believe me.

THe issue overall, though, isn;t a rounding problem, it has to do wtih how the formula determines "risk" and then how that risk assesment plugs into the other formulae that determine the possibility of critical failure. Apparently this section of code is likely in multiple layers of the code and likely dependent on several other fomulae as well, so it's just not an easy fix to revamp it, it would seem. So that's why I don;t think ti is that high on the priority list, per se.

However, I do know that the overall wonkiness with experimentation in general is high on the list and it was on the Doc Top 5 this last go around. THe Devs did respond that they would be reviewing the code in QA to see if they can find anything there, and I don't doubt they will if they look close enough. So maybe if some of that stuf can get fixed it will help alleviate some of the oddities you are seeing in experimentation now.

Also, if you are doing a lot of hand crafting and want to cut down on you experimentation failure rate, you may want to considering giving the Maleability rating on some of your resources (if any of them have it, that is) a bit higher weighting in your resource selection process, as OQ and Mal directly affect your experimentation failure rate.