Droid Engineer Archive

---

Malitevv wrote:

---

Tarne_Monter wrote:

For clarification on the re-crafting idea, I was thinking of the one where you could take an already created item and then reassemble it with new parts so that it could be in better shape than it was before you crafted it. Possibly you could even swap out things like droid modules.

---

The problem I see with this is I consider it very likely that any object in this game has any "memory" of the components that went into it and therefore can't really be deconstructed. The reason I consider it unlikely it remembers the components it was made from is because remembering all that cruft would be a considerable amount of data base space, which currently would serve no purpose. And I don't think adding that kind of load to the database would be worth adding the ability to deconstruct something. I suppose there may be a way to write algorithms that create new subcomponents that are likely different than the ones from which the item was made for the purposes of deconstruction, but that would be considerably less satisfying.

---

To elaborate on what Mal is saying, we have talked about modules breaking and deconstruction for a long time. When a Droid or object is finished, it simply has a "rating," like 110 Medical, or 107 Harvesting. The item really doesn't have a memory if that came from 1, 5, or 6 modules. So in order to implement this you would basically need to totally revamp, not only the entire crafting system, but how each object is looked and and tracked.

Now it may appear that a system like this is in place, with Lightsabers. Yet LS's are one item, with very few componants, their being broken down, was sort of built from the start. With JTL it looks like we may see this as well, yet again, adding such a system to new things is one thing, replacing the old system with new is something else.

---

Malitevv wrote:

---

Tarne_Monter wrote:

For clarification on the re-crafting idea, I was thinking of the one where you could take an already created item and then reassemble it with new parts so that it could be in better shape than it was before you crafted it. Possibly you could even swap out things like droid modules.

---

The problem I see with this is I consider it very likely that any object in this game has any "memory" of the components that went into it and therefore can't really be deconstructed. The reason I consider it unlikely it remembers the components it was made from is because remembering all that cruft would be a considerable amount of data base space, which currently would serve no purpose. And I don't think adding that kind of load to the database would be worth adding the ability to deconstruct something. I suppose there may be a way to write algorithms that create new subcomponents that are likely different than the ones from which the item was made for the purposes of deconstruction, but that would be considerably less satisfying.

---

True, the database hit would be substantial if some part of it not already there. I think that as long as you limited it to only replaceable sub-items, and sub-items that already give the end product some type of stat then it shouldn't be that bad. Of course you would have to define for each schematic which parts are "replaceable", and that could get really complicated for things like droids because of the sub-sub compents. But if you just leave that out and only replace things that affect stats(I include droid crafting stations in the term stat as well) then that doesn't really take up any more database room. The details are already there. And as long as the programmer were nice, then they can find the inverses of the forumlas for the final stats to extract the stats of the parts. In which case while technically (not a pointer to the original part) not the same as the original part it is effectively the same.

---

Drashk wrote:

---

Straker_Atrella wrote:

---

Malitevv wrote:

---

Tarne_Monter wrote:

For clarification on the re-crafting idea, I was thinking of the one where you could take an already created item and then reassemble it with new parts so that it could be in better shape than it was before you crafted it. Possibly you could even swap out things like droid modules.

---

The problem I see with this is I consider it very likely that any object in this game has any "memory" of the components that went into it and therefore can't really be deconstructed. The reason I consider it unlikely it remembers the components it was made from is because remembering all that cruft would be a considerable amount of data base space, which currently would serve no purpose. And I don't think adding that kind of load to the database would be worth adding the ability to deconstruct something. I suppose there may be a way to write algorithms that create new subcomponents that are likely different than the ones from which the item was made for the purposes of deconstruction, but that would be considerably less satisfying.

---

To elaborate on what Mal is saying, we have talked about modules breaking and deconstruction for a long time. When a Droid or object is finished, it simply has a "rating," like 110 Medical, or 107 Harvesting. The item really doesn't have a memory if that came from 1, 5, or 6 modules. So in order to implement this you would basically need to totally revamp, not only the entire crafting system, but how each object is looked and and tracked.

Now it may appear that a system like this is in place, with Lightsabers. Yet LS's are one item, with very few componants, their being broken down, was sort of built from the start. With JTL it looks like we may see this as well, yet again, adding such a system to new things is one thing, replacing the old system with new is something else.

---

One one last thing to chew on....

This would be for all professions and not just Droid Engineer. How would a suggestion such as this work for Chefs or Taliors who don't use as many subcomponents as we do?

The entire discussion needs to be made with all carfting professions in mind, not just our own.

---

---

Straker_Atrella wrote:

Drashk, your not refering to the "crafting insight bonus" credits are you? Those easily transfer over to all professions, in fact you offered the groundwork on what the bonuses could be.

---

---

Tarne_Monter wrote:

---

Drashk wrote:

---

Straker_Atrella wrote:

---

Malitevv wrote:

---

Tarne_Monter wrote:

For clarification on the re-crafting idea, I was thinking of the one where you could take an already created item and then reassemble it with new parts so that it could be in better shape than it was before you crafted it. Possibly you could even swap out things like droid modules.

---

The problem I see with this is I consider it very likely that any object in this game has any "memory" of the components that went into it and therefore can't really be deconstructed. The reason I consider it unlikely it remembers the components it was made from is because remembering all that cruft would be a considerable amount of data base space, which currently would serve no purpose. And I don't think adding that kind of load to the database would be worth adding the ability to deconstruct something. I suppose there may be a way to write algorithms that create new subcomponents that are likely different than the ones from which the item was made for the purposes of deconstruction, but that would be considerably less satisfying.

---

To elaborate on what Mal is saying, we have talked about modules breaking and deconstruction for a long time. When a Droid or object is finished, it simply has a "rating," like 110 Medical, or 107 Harvesting. The item really doesn't have a memory if that came from 1, 5, or 6 modules. So in order to implement this you would basically need to totally revamp, not only the entire crafting system, but how each object is looked and and tracked.

Now it may appear that a system like this is in place, with Lightsabers. Yet LS's are one item, with very few componants, their being broken down, was sort of built from the start. With JTL it looks like we may see this as well, yet again, adding such a system to new things is one thing, replacing the old system with new is something else.

---

One one last thing to chew on....

This would be for all professions and not just Droid Engineer. How would a suggestion such as this work for Chefs or Taliors who don't use as many subcomponents as we do?

The entire discussion needs to be made with all carfting professions in mind, not just our own.

---

Yeah, that's the main problem I've got. I don't know how to address some of the other crafting professions in the re-assembly part. Perhaps changing customization options, like color. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

---

And these points should be visible but not be tradeable

Message Edited by Atan on 09-16-2004 01:11 AM

---

Atan wrote:

One question about the CiC...

Do you really want Master Crafters who are active over several month equal to inactive players or new Masters?

I think the system should be more like you can get up to 100 points first. In the week after you hit your cap your cap is raised by lets say 5 points. and so on...

And you should decide yourself how much you want to spend on a single item, like a very very easy one 1-10 Credits (with the minimum benefit) up to the "normal" hardone for up to 100 Credits (good benefit) and if you are that good the "nightmare" hard ones for 200 and more.

And these points should be visible but not be tradeable

Or make the completing puzzles hard and you can "buy" hints with your CiC

MfG

Atan

---

They wouldn't be equal though. Your resources would still play a HUGE role in how good the item started out as. So old crafters would still have an edge.

Plus more experianced crafters will be better at the "mini-game," they will have done them, more and had more practice. It would take a while for newer crafters to get good at it.

---

Atan wrote:

One question about the CiC...

Do you really want Master Crafters who are active over several month equal to inactive players or new Masters?

---

In terms of the maximum number of CiC credits they can have: sure. why not? They've already got tons of advantages. And presumably, the active master crafter will be continually using his CiC's and then regenerating them as he progresses. The results ofall thatwill be reflected quite clearly in the quality of the wares on the vendor. The hard cap would be needed in my opinionfor a number of reasons:

1. if the CiCs are tradable and there is no fixed cap per player, the players with the highest caps/most money will seek to buy as many as the can and drive up the prices and create an imbalance where rich players are able to acquire as many CiC's as they want/need, and poor players are confined to generating their own over time. Not everyone is concerned about this, but I am. I really want to get the sometimes hyper-inflated economy out of the loop that determines the degree of a player's access to these CiCs.


2. players could potentially abuse the advantage that their CiCs give them if there is no cap. CiCs should be capped for the same reason that XP is capped, to prevent a player from accumulating vast quantities and then extracting one huge windfall advantage from them.

I suppose it'd be okay if the cap varied with skill level, but this might give players who choose two crafting professions as oppossed toa single crafting professionan advantage (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but something to consider). If basic professions aren't included, it might put DE's at a disadvantage because our reliance on master artisan is unbalanced relative to the other crafting professions.

---

Drashk wrote:

Straker,

All in all, I like the Crafting Insight Credits, butI think that they would more then likely need to come at a cost of some sort. If we were to move away from Loot items, whether bought or dropped off NPCs, we would need the cost to be tangable such as spending XP.

For X amount of XP 'given' to a Junk Dealer, you gain 1 Crafting Insight Credit.

If its XP based, then we now have a reason to Hand Craft more often, so that we can gain additional Crafting Insight Credits, which would allow you produce better quality items.

---

How is a loot item that is generated as a result of hand-crafting any less than the cost of of a loot item that is generated by killing an NPC? Combat characters do what they do: they fight. They get loot drops for it. Crafting characters do what they do: they craft. Why shouldn't they get loot drops for it? I suppose you could say their "loot" is the sale of their wares, but I see that as different. If the loot isn't tradable (or the caps on ownership of this loot are so harsh, that trading opportunities are quite infrequent), they aren't really gaining much at all from these CiC's from an economic perspective, aside from a little fun that lets them jump into a mini-game that lets them create a slightly better item next time.

I've also been thinking though that it could be tied directly to XP. CiC's could be tossed out entirely, and instead crafters could have the option of burning their XP to enhance their items. There is precedent for this idea... table top RPGs use this sort of mechanic to balance the benefits that certain classes/professions can extract from creating extraordinary items.

---

Malitevv wrote:

I've also been thinking though that it could be tied directly to XP. CiC's could be tossed out entirely, and instead crafters could have the option of burning their XP to enhance their items. There is precedent for this idea... table top RPGs use this sort of mechanic to balance the benefits that certain classes/professions can extract from creating extraordinary items.

---

---

Atan wrote:

---

Malitevv wrote:

I've also been thinking though that it could be tied directly to XP. CiC's could be tossed out entirely, and instead crafters could have the option of burning their XP to enhance their items. There is precedent for this idea... table top RPGs use this sort of mechanic to balance the benefits that certain classes/professions can extract from creating extraordinary items.

---

This looks like something to look into for the post FS grind xp, right now i think that big XP sink is enough.

And if it goes over the XP, what about the novices? They need the XP to level up and would either be able to compete on the market (by using it up) OR advancing in the profession... dont know if that is the right way...

having 2 different kinds would be the more newbie friendly version

MfG

Atan

---