CUEmu - Thread Posts

Straker_Atrella

Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:28 pm

Drashk wrote:

Here is something that I have failed to see anyone point out about Subcomponent experimentation.

If Experimentation isn't included in the Subcomponents, where would it come into play? Without some form of experimentable Integrity Rating, we once again end up with another Cookie-Cutter feature. If we place all of the importance on the final Deed, we end up forcing ourselves into being 12 point crafters and have to make a decision between HAM and Integrity Rating. If we place all of the importance on Modules, then single module droids and droids in which Integrity would matter, such as combat droids, would suffer.

By placing the emphasis on Subcomponents, we achieve two things -

Subcomponent experimentation would have the largest effect on the Integrity Rating, with at least 50% of the overall rating coming from the Subcomponents.

We would have a crafting profession where experimentation matters and we take one step further from the Cookie-Cutters we once built.

From a Developer stand point, something that I feel needs mentioning.....

The DE community has asked that Experimentation make more of a difference in our profession, since the first days of the game. From the comments made throughout this Project, any time alternate experimentation is brought up, some in the community have spoken against such a suggestion. This would send a very mixed signal to the Developer team. From the Developer stand point, the DE community is coming across as saying that we only want increased Experimentation, but only if that experimentation comes without any form of mini-game.

The above statement is not made to 'push' what I believe to be the correct way. It is made to shine some light on how the Developers could possibly see this debate. Sometimes, in order to get certain changes accomplished, we may need to accept a certain amount of increased complexity for the betterment of the system.

The Experimentation topic will be one of the topics during Phase 2 of this project. The main poll options would be something along these lines..

Experimentation on all components has an effect on the Integrity Rating, including subcomponents, chassis', modules, and Deed

Experimentation on some components has an effect on the Integrity Rating, including subcomponents, Chassis' and Deeds.

Experimentation on only subcomponents and Chassis'has an effect on the Integrity Rating.

Experimentation on onlyDeeds has an effect on the Integrity Rating.

Experimentation on only Modules has an effect on the Integrity Rating.

The Integrity Rating is determined solely by the Droid Model. No Experimentation would be involved.

This is only a sample of a possible poll. It is not ment to be voted upon at this time. I wanted to include it to put an emphasis on what we would need to look at, when trying to decide how the Integrity Rating would be achieved.

Guess it got glossed over in all the posts, here Drashk, I think I can answer this.

Integrity would be experimented on in the final Combine and "maybe," the chasis. You would have the choice to experiment on HAM or integrity, this would prevent it from being "cookie cutter." I have to agree with this, experimenting on sub-componants is simply to much.

Drash you said. "The DE community has asked that Experimentation make more of a difference in our profession, since the first days of the game. "

Honestly, I think you are misinterpreting that. People don't want it to matter more in sub-componants or how we make the droids. They want it in the MODULES. A perfect example is the Stimpack Module, you can split your XP points between Charges or Capacity. The Survey Droid is another example. THAT is what people want. THAT is what people have been asking for.

We got it in some small forms during the Droid revamp, but usually (such as JTL,) most of the new DE stuff isn't like this. A 10 point DE is just as good as a 12 point DE.

Now if existing content "must" be changed (not saying it does,) an example of what would be good is combat modules. Have one exp line dictate speed, have another dictate damage.

That is the type of exp people want, not on meaningless subcomponants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Droid Vendor at Resurection near Theed on Naboo -5757 6222. Both carry a wide variety of maxed Droids, I also carry every type of Droid and Droid supply.

*Straker Atrella: Dark Jedi * Atrella's Wench: Master Droid Engineer / Artisan / Scout / Merchant * Dark Vortex: Ranger / Rifleman * Havana:Musician / Dancer / Image Design * Enigmatica : Doctor / Swordsman* CrazyEyes: Role playing BH.

Gron_DM

Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:04 pm

#28

i wasnt talking about DH/DC AO im talking about becoming part of the combat support tree, as it stands now we dont have a part is that.. currently there is Powerups, stims/meds, buffs, food and spice. and of course or combat droids......now given this combat balance is completely reseting the whole system now is the time we can get a wide number of perks....droid range accuracy/dmg/speed powerups, same for melee....there is a ton of new possible apps and if we dont get considered into the balance now, it will be called adding checkers later. in other words if we are ever going to get powerups/combat support (for everyone not just DH/DC) it will happen now and NOT later. i personally think this is more critical then decay as we are in the midst of getting the combat upgrade worked on....3 months till a beta or more is what TH said...if you all want decay over being in the big picture for SWG that is your call, i just know that while decay is a huge issue there is a time for these kinds of lobbying and now is the time for droid combat support lobbying.

Vilance -Retired from SWG
MDE for most of it, Guildleader as well
EGC Founding leader August 03
Corbantis
Founding Mayor Of Rhuidean, Tatooine
placed Nov 03.

duncje

Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:35 pm

#29

We have the most subcomponent-dependent crafting of any other profession in the game. If experimentation on subcomponents is made so that it matters, maybe we can reduce the total number of subcomponents used? I mean we put subcomponents inside subcomponents, seemingly endlessly.

I could stand behind a system like you've proposed, Drashk, if somehow the subcomponent dependency is reduced somewhat. But having to experiment on multiple subcomponents, just to make more experimentable subcomponents is a complete timesink that we don't need. It gets monotonous real quick, and will severely put a drain on factories, now with the increased time for experimented parts.

Beebo
Master Droid Engineer | Shipwright | Master Artisan
Crazy Beebo's Discount Droids & Ships {-1075 -2924} Bestine, Tatooine

AudioOrgana

Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:37 pm

#30

<---- Points up to Straker's post.

Drashk, please re-read my postings if you have failed to see alternatives pointed out, because I and others have, where we have suggested exactly what Straker has repeated above. I actually said it several times - add some extra metal/ore/etc. to either the chassis (on advanced droids) or the final combine on deeds for non-advanced droids, and experimentation here is where the integrity figure comes from. This would add some liability on our part - we will need to use HQ resources in the assemble in order to get high integrity.

We want experimentation to MATTER is what we have always said, not that we wanted it to happen on each and every component. We want it in all future modules (as the Level 1-6 system is static and a waste on the high-end - you can't make a level 6 module "better", you can just get around needing them by experimenting on lower modules), but for something that will become secondary to function it is just unneccesary for us to have to experiment on every little subcomponent to achieve it.

Again, please read this thread once more - I know you are busy with so many topics going on, but this one is important enough to approach with a fresh mind. Please read what I said suggesting alternatives, and please read especially my "aiming for mediocrity" posting in reply to your detail about how experimentation wouldn't have to be on "all components", even though it is available on them, to reach a "cap".

I think the overwhelming number of posts made here say the same thing - we want decay, but not the complex component experimentation put forth here. To solve the issue of experimentation, instead of the "let's get rid of chassis althogether" idea which most people seem to have rejected, we should make ALL droids require a chassis. Non-ADV droids would just need less parts, but all droids would require a chassis. Make the experimentation on that chassis be the integrity.

Alternatively, as I also said in a posting above, you could provide integrity experimentation on two levels - one, the chassis, and two, the deed. On non-ADV droids (if we don't give them chassis) you would only be able to experiment at the deed level, meaning it can't get as high as the ADV - giving another advantage to ADV models over simply holding more modules. This would also provide a great dynamic with HAM experimentation - you'd have to decide to put your points into HAM or Integrity - so if you want a droid with high HAM it will not last as long (combat droids), but if you settle for less HAM (for utility droids) the droid is less "volitile" and will last longer. This keeps people from making one-uber set of stats (best HAM and best Integrity at the same time). Combat droids should decay more quickly than utility droids, and this would give people that option - not many Doc's care about the HAM on their droid so experimentation is something you just do for the heck of it on those droids. Now you'd be able to get somthing out of it. It also would give DE's a reason to get 12-point experimentation past droid repair kits and survey droids.

I won't go on, I'm just repeating what I've already said - but we definately have proposed alternatives in this thread. You don't need to explain again how your system would work, I really do think we get what you are trying to say - but what *we* are trying to say is that we don't need it to be so complex, which even if we do aim for medoicrity in construction it will still be. Integrity should be like it is for other professions - something that is considered but not an overwhelming focus of the crafting in the profession.

This isn't a mixed-message to the Devs at all - we want experimentation to matter on stats that are attractive to people, stats that affect their play; we also want a *simple* form of decay.

We aren't asking for that to be some big, involved process - just for droids to eventually die and require replacement.

The same function could be achieved by the Devs just turning decay on (100/100) and not even experimenting at all; we just need decay to exist. Sure it would be nice if we could experiment on it at the chassis and/or deed level, because it would provide uniqueness and more fun on our end for droids, but it doesn't help the end goal - to sell more droids. That's why we asked for decay in the first place, and how we go about it doesn't have much effect on how our customers percieve it or their user experience on a deep level. Asking for it on the sub-component level is not fun, but tedious, and not necessary for balance (it doesn't need to be *harder* than other professions) nor enhancing our crafting experience enough to justify the bother.

The system proposed here would make such a deep change to how we construct droids, when a simple system would have the same benefit our profession was asking for in the first place - droids to decay and die. It would be nice to be able to experiment on that stat, but I don't want to spend my whole DE life (or even a signifigant portion) thinking about it. We are not asking for anything here that is really worthy of punishing ourselves like that (balance wise) - we just are asking for the implementation of a system that should have been here to begin with.

AO

Straker_Atrella

Mon Dec 06, 2004 4:58 pm

#31

Stupid forums timed me out and I forgot to copy and paste my post /sigh.

Ok, this one wont be as good, but here it goes.

Drashk, don't take this personal man, it's not, you and I have always had an odd posting relationship. I respect you and your ideas, but I need to say this.

No I didn't start in Nov03, I started in about Feb04, so yes I did miss the first couple of months. I missed a lot of bad Droid days that I have only heard about. Yet at the same time, I have been here ever since. Not only posting here on the forums, but making a DE business where other DE's were already established. So even though I may notbe one of the starting DE's, I am not a noob.

You are the opposite Drashk, you were here in the begining, yet then left, taking some time off. While I am sure you have caught up on changes and what people want, sometimes you seem to be stuck thinking of posts from that "before" time.What may have been a request or want back then has evolved into something else now. There is also the fact that you play on TC mostly (if not exclusively,) money is meaningless there. You make droids only for the sheer pleasure of making droids. Sure you can reflect back on how you used to run business, but it's different now.

Don't get me wrong Drashk, your posts are great and I respect them, you just seem to have more of an Old-fashioned mindset that has sort of evolved into something new for us.

Now back on topic.

Craffting professions are pluses and minuses, some may need tons of resources, others need lots of named resources. Scout stuff is required for some and not others. There are 2 types of crafting balance, actual crafting balance and economy balance.

Balancing a crafting profession is not easy, you need to have pluses and minuses. AS and WS are pretty fairly balanced, they have pluses and minuses, and have a niche in the economy. They are balanced in both ways.

Now DE's burden to bear is Sub-componants, we need a lot of them. Crates and Crates of supplies is what we deal with, this is a negative balanced by the fact that we can use crappy stuff for them.As a crafting profession, we are "balanced," meaning when craftig, the downside is offset by upsides.

However DE's need a place in the economy, we are not balanced there. Decay and your integrity system would be a great step in balancing this. Now adding a "small" negative into our crafting to offset this positive, for example, needing to use good stuff on Utility Droids for integrity, is ok. Yet there is ZERO reason to add a large negative into our crafting process. Adding decay can be done without that.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Droid Vendor at Resurection near Theed on Naboo -5757 6222. Both carry a wide variety of maxed Droids, I also carry every type of Droid and Droid supply.

*Straker Atrella: Dark Jedi * Atrella's Wench: Master Droid Engineer / Artisan / Scout / Merchant * Dark Vortex: Ranger / Rifleman * Havana:Musician / Dancer / Image Design * Enigmatica : Doctor / Swordsman* CrazyEyes: Role playing BH.

AudioOrgana

Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:59 pm

#32

Straker_Atrella wrote:
However DE's need a place in the economy, we are not balanced there. Decay and your integrity system would be a great step in balancing this. Now adding a "small" negative into our crafting to offset this positive, for example, needing to use good stuff on Utility Droids for integrity, is ok. Yet there is ZERO reason to add a large negative into our crafting process. Adding decay can be done without that.

Exactly.

I couldn't have put it better. This is the crux of the issue - we'd be unbalancing ourselves in terms of construction complexity just to fix a problem in the economy side that we already "deserve" to have fixed. We aren't asking for a bigger slice of pie - we are asking to just have our piece of pie need freshening once in awhile to get some sort of circular DE economy instead of the BOON-->THUD-->rinse->repeat we have been burdened with since launch (which, admittedly, is better than the constant THUD we had in the early days).

Removing experimentation from components would be very easy. It was done in JTL beta to the Flight Computers in a matter of days after the Dev posted saying it was his solution to the problem (that experimented flight computers got bumped up a level making them uncerted to the pilots). I'm sure it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

We should fight for experimentation not to keep what we already have, but to any new enhancements we get. We will have dynamic enough experimentation by using a couple of different resources (again, ore, a particular metal, etc.) and the stats on those (UT? SR? A combination?) affecting durability as well as whatever experimentation points the DE puts into it. Again, making a droid deed a multi-line experimentation would provide a great dynamic - forcing the choice of HAM or integrity or the many levels in between.

(BTW, Straker, as to the new round of forum timeout problems : 1) click login at the page it sends you to (do not click back!), 2) login, 3) THEN go back. Your post will still be there. I lost a few long ones before I figured that out.)

AO

Message Edited by AudioOrgana on 12-06-2004 09:00 PM

DigitalOne

Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:42 pm

#33

We have very little "Attention capitol" so to speak. We have been the subject of 2 patches dedicated to us, which where reasonably successfull in updating us making the class playable. The developers are trying to sustain an entire game, the most complicated in history, not Droid engineers alone. I am glad they know we need some forsightfull tweaking to make us effective members in the economy game vis a vis. But we cannot demand from them more than we need. We need to be insightfull, descreete, and effective. To make droids which are square blocks, fit into the game which is a round hole is ambitious but not impossible. Sure we have to shave some edges but we dont have to whittle ourselves a giraffe.

Drask, im not sure what to make of you. Your very skilled at hammering out these proposals, but im not sure where youre coming from. You seem to be working from the old model. I'm not going to play you for stupid, you know we have evolved as a comunity, last years issues no longer apply. We're not trying to curesmall poxhere, we are trying to cure AIDS.To say the droid engineer community is sending mixed messages is a missobservation, I think we have been quite clear stating what wewant.The general conclusion of every single postconcerning experementation has been clear,wedo wantexperementation. So much is clear. We don't feel the need to have to experement on every last thing. The Benifits we achive through experementation can be garnered though certain pieces, and dont require that all parts are involved in the process. To put experementation on all subcomponents is superfluous in design and an impractical in practice.

Simply put experementation on Chassis, Deeds, modules, powerups, etc. But there is no driving need to put them on subcomponents. Unless you know somthing we dont know.

JavelinCatcher

Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:05 pm

#34

I think Drashk's idea is to shoot for something more unreasonable, and let it fall slightly short (leaving us only experiementing on chasis anyway). That being said, I feel that experimentation should matter where it should count. As confusing as that sounds, Droids are defined by their installed modules and that's where the experimentation should matter the most. However, I would not be against making experimentation matter more on chasis (for that integrity value) than every sub component.

----Nolhta Fyoen----Master Rifleman/Master Smugger----StarStrider
----Nolhta Fyoen----Master Droid Engineer----TestCenter
----Accoubacca----TKA/Commando---TestCenter
----Nolhta Fyoen----Master Droid Engineer----Gorath

CUAlpha: Team Droid Engineer

Drashk

Mon Dec 06, 2004 10:22 pm

#35

Once upon a time, someone came into the Droid Engineering Community asking, 'What's your motivation?'

This question was asked in order to try and understand '(y)our change of heart'. If you aren't familiar with whatI am refering to, do a seach on the subject in this forum, with the author of the thread being a certain Red name.

The way that I have been conducting much of the Project Droid Engineer series is to lay out information for the DEV team. DigitalOne hit upon some of what I have been trying to do, but didn't quite grasp the reason behind the motivation. JavelinCatchter sees a little more of the whys and what fors behind what I have been trying to do.

Each time that I have tried to come up with a system change, I have tried to look at the subject in the same mind set as the Developers. Since the Experimentation lines on all subcomponents already exsist, the transition between changing the currently exsisting experimentation would be easier then removing the lines and trying to make use of some other point in construction.

I've also tried to use information that has been gathered since launch and apply it to todays Droid Engineer. In order to show that the many of the priorities of our profession have changed, I have tried to use older information to gain the reactions that we have been seeing, when it comes to experimentation. By framing the topic of certain types of experimentation in a certain light, we now have a very informative number of posts that we can draw upon, to show the DEVs what it is we want to see, and what it is we do not wish to see. I have been trying to get that point across in each and every topic in Project: Droid Engineer.

The old axiom 'Measure twice, cut once.' applies to what we are currently doing. It is always better if overshoot our goals and then take the time to whittle away the excess, then to start to small and later find the need to add more after the fact.

Making SWG more Star Warsy. One droid at a time.

Straker_Atrella

Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:53 pm

#36

Here is what I just don't understand. Collecting ideas for the Devs is great, we need to do it. Yet why do they have to be so complicated? The more complicated stuff is, the less likely it is we will see it. There is simply more work involved.

Take this idea, drop all the experimentation on sub-componants, and we have a winner. Exp matters on the chasis and Deed. Less coding, less work, and it seems like that is what "most" DE's want.

Leave sub-componants alone. Don't remove the lines, don't change them, don't do anything with them at least for now. Yes they are broken and stupid, but there are far more broken and stupid things in the game that need fixing first. Maybe way down the road they can go, but it's not "hurting" anything or anybody.

Fix what is "hurting" people not annoying first. Decay needs added, it's hurting DE's. Add it and keep it simple.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Droid Vendor at Resurection near Theed on Naboo -5757 6222. Both carry a wide variety of maxed Droids, I also carry every type of Droid and Droid supply.

*Straker Atrella: Dark Jedi * Atrella's Wench: Master Droid Engineer / Artisan / Scout / Merchant * Dark Vortex: Ranger / Rifleman * Havana:Musician / Dancer / Image Design * Enigmatica : Doctor / Swordsman* CrazyEyes: Role playing BH.

JavelinCatcher

Tue Dec 07, 2004 12:16 am

#37

Drashk wrote:

Once upon a time, someone came into the Droid Engineering Community asking, 'What's your motivation?'

This question was asked in order to try and understand '(y)our change of heart'. If you aren't familiar with whatI am refering to, do a seach on the subject in this forum, with the author of the thread being a certain Red name.

That was a good trip down memory lane. Anyone who doubts AO or TK's ferrocity should read that thread (AO on page 1, TK on page 2).

...although, I'm not sure we ever truly answered his question on "motivation" the way he would have wanted it, it all comes back to a couple principals:

1) A desireable product for everyone's playstyle

2) A re-occuring market

As bomb droid R3's have proved, people don't care how "consumable" a Droid can be as long has #1 is satisfied. #1 is for the customer, #2 is for us. If we are building a system for #2; it should be constructed so that it is fun/challenging, but not burdoning.

Drashk, you're sticking your neck out like this and taking the criticism well. AO and company are just expressing some things that limit the "fun factor" for them. However, while we have the "vocal" majority of us commenting we don't have nearly the size of comments equal to the "Change of Heart" thread.

----Nolhta Fyoen----Master Rifleman/Master Smugger----StarStrider
----Nolhta Fyoen----Master Droid Engineer----TestCenter
----Accoubacca----TKA/Commando---TestCenter
----Nolhta Fyoen----Master Droid Engineer----Gorath

CUAlpha: Team Droid Engineer

Drashk

Tue Dec 07, 2004 12:37 am

#38

Straker_Atrella wrote:

Here is what I just don't understand. Collecting ideas for the Devs is great, we need to do it. Yet why do they have to be so complicated? The more complicated stuff is, the less likely it is we will see it. There is simply more work involved.

Take this idea, drop all the experimentation on sub-componants, and we have a winner. Exp matters on the chasis and Deed. Less coding, less work, and it seems like that is what "most" DE's want.

Leave sub-componants alone. Don't remove the lines, don't change them, don't do anything with them at least for now. Yes they are broken and stupid, but there are far more broken and stupid things in the game that need fixing first. Maybe way down the road they can go, but it's not "hurting" anything or anybody.

Fix what is "hurting" people not annoying first. Decay needs added, it's hurting DE's. Add it and keep it simple.

Here is the thing. To not fix the experimentation code when the non-Combat Upgrade comes around would be to postpone having it removed indefinetely. When I have spoken of overall 'health' of the profression, this is one of the topics that I have been speaking of. Even though it is of little importanance to you, having 2 lines of experimentation on such a large portion ofour craftables, that has 0 effect on anything,creates a rather unhealthy profession. When someone newentersthe Droid Engineer profession,besides what to grind, whatisoneof the firstquestions to be asked? "What should I experiment?"

This is part ofone of the fundimental problems with the DE profession. Even though it many not seem like such a large issue, it has a negative psychological effect on the people building droids. Don't take my word for it. Spend some time with a profession such as Chef, Armorsmith, or Weaponsmith, where experimentation matters most. Take a few weeks off from crafting droids, to persue one of these crafting professions, where Experimentation works 95% of the time, meaning that each line has some sort of visual impact on crafting. Then return to Droid crafting and make parts that have a rating, that appears to not matter at all.

If you pay attention to your psychological responses, you will realize that having the Experimentation lines that have 0 meaning are a detriment to our crafting profession. This is one of the stronger reasons that many people have left the profession for other crafting professions.

Something needs to change with the crafting system that we currently have. Whether this means that Experimentation on Subcomponents is made to have an effect, or the values are completely removed are the options that we have. To leave them in, during development time geared towards repairing different issues within each profession, would be like leaving in one of the largest and longest stand bugs in any profession.

This would be a bug fix, plan and simple.

Making SWG more Star Warsy. One droid at a time.

Drashk

Tue Dec 07, 2004 12:53 am

#39

JavelinCatcher wrote:

Drashk, you're sticking your neck out like this and taking the criticism well. AO and company are just expressing some things that limit the "fun factor" for them. However, while we have the "vocal" majority of us commenting we don't have nearly the size of comments equal to the "Change of Heart" thread.

The highlighted part in green really says a lot. The DE community has really become a lot quiter then it was just 6 months ago. We have a lot less people getting involved on this forum, which makes my job as Correspondent a lot easier and a lot harder at the same time.

Its easier, since I have a smaller number of people to 'poll'. Its harder due to those smaller numbers, since I must listen to not only the forum goers, but people that I have contact with in game and via PMs.

I wish more people would take the time to post their comments on each of the threads, so that we can gather more information for a larger cross section of Droid Engineers, in stead of a lot of post from the same 6 Droid Engineers. Both have valuable input on the Project; however a larger number of posters would help to strength what is being written.

Making SWG more Star Warsy. One droid at a time.

Droid Engineer Archive

Thread: Project: Droid Engineer Droid Decay System