Shipwright Archive
Thread: Experimentation @ 0(zero) risk... Critical Failure!?
Tokklyym wrote:
Are you using the best possible tool and crafting station? I find that critical fails on experimentation happen more often on public stations and poorly made private stations as opposed to good home models.
I use the best quality resources, I'm in a research city and my crafting station is +42 and my crafting tool is +14.89.
I can't get much better than that and I'm a Master Droid Engineer. I shouldn't get more than 1 out of 100 crafts have a critical failure. There is something wrong with there calculations when I can craft 10-15 items and two of them get a critical failure.
But what is the point of critical failures? It doesn't effect the economy, except for architects and shipwrights it doesn't waste much resources. The only thing it does is waste game time and make me upset.
Alen
Radiant
The only hard data I know of is here: http://swg-cantina.com/pages/frating/frsum.html>
That's interesting. Goes against a whole lot of conventional wisdom, however.
I hunted around the Architect forum stickies, and all I found was this:
From "19 answers" posted by Thunderheart on April 22:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=in_live&message.id=12250&page=1
"What is the exact effect that the effectiveness rating on crafting tools and Crafting stations have on the crafting process and are they working as intended?
The effectiveness rating on crafting tools and stations influences the chance of success or failure during the assembly and experimentation stages. These are working as intended."
Tokklyym wrote:
I hunted around the Architect forum stickies, and all I found was this:
From "19 answers" posted by Thunderheart on April 22:
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=in_live&message.id=12250&page=1
"What is the exact effect that the effectiveness rating on crafting tools and Crafting stations have on the crafting process and are they working as intended?
The effectiveness rating on crafting tools and stations influences the chance of success or failure during the assembly and experimentation stages. These are working as intended."
Much more comfortable with that.
And yes, a counter to an amazing success is a simple failure, you lost the points you put in. Clearing out a bar when an amazing success gives you at best an extra 5% is rediculous. That's not a counterbalance, that's overkill.
Such things make me angry all the time when they happen
cheers
Exi
Brilyn wrote:< Really this has no effect on game play other than making people mad that they lost resources and hard work. >Their needs to be some sort of counter to Amazing Successes.Simple 'not having Amazing Successes' isn't a counter balance.Then there's the fabled Critical Successes.
Personally it should be a series of Successes. From maybe moderate success (maybe only 1 exp box) to amazing success (lots of boxes). I'm not saying the we should get amazing success all the time. I think that for assembly and experimentation that they should get rid of the critical failures, especially if your a master of your profession. At one time I had 4 swoop bikes with 0% experimentation. I still had experimentation points left but it wouldn't bring up the stats so I was stuck with 4 swoop bikes with the lowest hitpoints you can have. Thats 8k of quality resources down the drain. I might have been able to use the points I still had to bring it up a little and maybe get 8-16k out of it, but no body wanted them, a swoop bike that wouldn't last a day of riding.
They finally brought down the shuttle and space port times to 5 minutes. Did it hurt game play? No, but it did reduce the level of frustration that people had waiting 10 min for the shuttle and space port.
Thats what they need to do here. Get rid of a crafters frustration by getting rid of critical failures.
Alen
Radiant
.
. I am also an Ithorian, so that extra +10 to chassis (and others) assembly I find has a noticeable difference, especially with port/cake for those special orders.Here's a model of how it works.
Result = Rating + Roll
Risk = 100 - Rating (Any rating at 100 or higher shows as zero risk)
Rating: Calculated from your experiment skill and modified by average MA on the resources and how many points you spend. 900 MA is a 10 skill bonus, 100 MA is a -10 skill penalty. Each extra point used at the same time is a -5 skill penalty. The formula for the rating is:
50 + (Average_MA - 500)/40 + Experiment_Skill - 5*Points_Used
Average_MA follows the same rules as if it had a hidden 'MA 100%' experiment line. It is weighted by resource quantity and resources without MA are not counted. If none of the resources have MA, the Average_MA is considered zero which is not fair for Chefs and BEs. Points_Used is 1 if you only use one point.
Roll: Random roll. Rolling below a limit will always give a critical failure regardless of your rating and above another limit will always give amazing success. (Think of it as in RPGs where an original 1 or 20 on 20-sided die overrides your base chance.) Research City, Bespin Port and maybe crafting stations and tools modifies your roll before checking the limits and thus lessens your chance of critical failures. As well as improving your chance for amazing success. (The impact of crafting stations and tools seems to be fairly small if any.)
Risk: This is your chance of getting any kind of failure. Note that the lower results like marginally successful are not technically considered failures even though it feels like it. At zero risk you can no longer get any type of failure except critical from the override on the roll.
Great Success gives you 7% and Amazing Success gives 8.05%. Good success and the others gives 3.5% and less. Normal Failure gives -7% and Critical Failure gives -14%. These percentages are multiplied by the number of points you spend. If you drop down to 0% from failures you can no longer increase the percentage.
Some general advice on experimenting. For conservative experimenting you should spend at least 2 points each time. Using 2 points effectively halves your chance of critical failure without reducing you chance of great success noticably. You may even do fine with 3 or 4 points at Master.
If you are experimenting on multiple lines and absolutely need almost only amazing successes for a schematic, you have to do another approach. Then you should spend as many points as possible and hope for the amazing override. The chance of getting many smaller amazing in a row is just too remote.
There are other variants. For example the bikes mentioned above where dropping to 0% really hurts. Don't start out with more than one point. With decent resources you will probably start above 14% and can survive an initial critical failure. Continue by never spending more points than the current percentage divided by 14.Stillif you drop down below 14 and get another critical nothing can save you.
Lunariel