Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: It happened again :)
Obo_alCan wrote:
Would your 12's and 13's on mech quality be associated with great and amazing assembly successes?
It would be interesting to see if a stack of 6 of those 12's (all identical) and then another stack of 6 of the 13's would produce a different final rating. In other words is the hidden decimal rating on the two models different.
Obo, I can never ever ever get a 12 on an amazing succes. Yet on greats, I can get both.
I actually triedmaking a12's droid. Got the same final number. I suspect the hidden decimal rating wasn't high enough.
Malitevv wrote:
Straker_Atrella wrote:
Hmm ok, when I get home, I'll need to look at that 8/10s of a box thing. Never really looked at partial boxes, nor noticed them really.
How do you explain that if I fill all the boxes one time, I get a 18 rated module with 13 quality, then the next time I get one with 12 quality. Yet all the boxes are filled the same way. This leads me to believe that even in the experimentation stage things are not as simple as we think.
The type of module and the actual scores that are associated with experimentation are irrelevant so far as this point is concerned. It's just an issue of the experimentation percentage. Your experimentation success for each bar is always a number between 0% and 100%. And it is that percentage I am talking about. How that percentage translates to a stat is a secondary detail so far as I can tell. The crafted item stat in question will be equal to percent*(the maximum value for that stat). But that doesn't play a role in determining what percentage you get.
Each experimentation box equates to 10% of the experimentation. And the stats of the resources determine how many experimentable boxes will be there. So suppose the item requires one resource type and depends on100% overall quality and the overall quality of your resource is say 650. Then you will have 7 experimentation boxes available to you when you start experimenting. If you fill them all successfully, your final experimentation percentage will be 65%. If the OQ of the resource used is say 982 then you will have 10 experimentation boxes available to you when you start experimenting and if you successfully fill them all, your final experimentation percentage will be 98%. Now there is evidence that it is actually 98.2% in that case. Because you can see the result of that extra 0.2% when you combine things like detonation or combat modules together and watch how the hidden fractional percentages add up. In the case of detonation modules it is very easy to experiment and test that this is the case. For more complex items, the max experimentation that you can achieve is determined by the weighted sum of the stats of the resources, but the basic idea is the same.
In any case, that is the way it usually works.
In any case, when this "ultra-amazing assembly" happens these rules change. When the ultra amazing assembly happens people are observing that they are able to experiment to a percentage that is higher than what the resources should allow. If you got an "ultra-amazing" assembly when crafting a final droid while using 980 OQ chemical, you would find that you are able to experiment all the way to 100% even though the 980 on the resource's OQ would ordinarily set the experimentation percentage cap at 98%.
In terms of what you are asking, if you successfully completely fill all of the relevant experimentation boxes, the result should always be the same. Your not being clear about what you mean by "filled the same way". When you say that do you mean that the final experimentation percentages reported for each experimentation bar are identical?? Even if they appear to be, you can't know if they really are unless all relevant experimentation bars are completely and totally experimented. When you say "filled the same way" do you mean that all experimentation boxes are completely full and there is nothing left for you to experiment on? Or do you mean something else?
Also responding to your other post.
What I mean by filled all the way, I mean all boxes are experimented on, and I can't experiment anymore. Plus the final % is the same. Heck, I'll take some screens to show you what I mean, later tonight or tomorrow. Basically, all the exp boxes are filled, and both sets of modules have a final % of like 89%. They are both rated 18, yet one has a mech quality of 12, the other a 13.
That tells me that something is different.
I don't think that there is a "super amazing assembly" at all. I think that EVERY assembly has a bonus (or minus,) adding to the % (start and final.) In most cases, this modifier will be to small to be noticed, yet in those rare cases where you are on the top edge, it will make the item better.
In my case, this "assembly role" possibly makes my module hit 13 mech quality (possible) about 75% of the time. Yet that other 25% of the time, it doesn't. No matter what, it doesn't look like this bonus will push my actually mod rating to the next level.
Are all boxes on all experimentation bars completely filled? Or are you just saying that you did experiment on all boxes but some of them may not be full? If it is the former and you are seeing different mech quality results for the same resources, I'd like to see the screen shots, because it is my understanding that this is impossible without the "freak" assembly.
Straker_Atrella wrote:
What I mean by filled all the way, I mean all boxes are experimented on, and I can't experiment anymore. Plus the final % is the same. Heck, I'll take some screens to show you what I mean, later tonight or tomorrow. Basically, all the exp boxes are filled, and both sets of modules have a final % of like 89%. They are both rated 18, yet one has a mech quality of 12, the other a 13.
Straker_Atrella wrote:
Yea I get what your saying and I agree. I just think that there is an assembly modifier that should be figured into your equation. In 95% of our cases, that modifier is a non-issue. However, in some rare cases, it does matter. For example, if your equation says there should be 12.25 boxes, it will round down to 12. So the modifier wouldn't matter unless it would take you over 13. This is why food, your tool, and where your crafting may help.
Basically, what I'm saying is that perhaps the rules don't change, there are just factors in the equation we don't know about.
But it doesn't round. if the formula that factors in the weights calculates 9.8, you get ten boxes but you are only able to fill thelast box 8/10thsof the way. So it can't have anything to do with rounding.
It is possible that there is a missing factor. that factor appears to be this: if your assembly result is so ultra amazing that the initial starting percentages for a given experimentation bar are greater than what an amazing assembly usually gives you, then the difference between the percentage you got and the percentage that an amazing assembly usually yields is added to the maximum possible experimentation percentage, or some portion of that difference. it's possible that they put something like that in to add randomness and unpredictability to the process. I personally think it's dumb even if it is on purpose, because it doesn't seem to factor in skill or resource stats or anything based on what people are reporting. The game just randomly sometimes decides to add a portion of the assembly result to the maximum possible experimentation rather than simply using it to pre-fill some of the experimentation boxes.
Message Edited by Malitevv on 09-01-2004 12:54 PM
.
Rippen
Rippen208 wrote:
Drashk, did you make a schematic of the 19-rated module, and put it into an R3? What was the final rating? I need to know if my 117-rated droid is still second on the leader board.
I may not play on SF much anymore, but I'm not a fool. Well, not a fool most of the time anyway. 
I made a small factory run of 6 modules and stacked them into an Adv R3. Each Combat cluster ended up with a rating of 58. When I combined them in the droid, I ended up with a total... *Low Power* 
I ended up with a rating of 117. Sorry Rippen, but it looks like we are now tied for quality.