Smuggler Archive
Thread: The Debate: Slicing Experimentation
slugeater wrote:I'd say you'd have to mitigate slice % with something like 25% WUK quality, 25% knife quality, 50% clamp quality, 40% FAN quality. The latter two not stackable of course. Leave some randomness in it to get the following figures. (Keeping with a max 35% slice)
- WUK 100% quality: 20%+1-5% of 35
- Knife 100% quality: 20%+1-5% of 35
- Clamp 100% quality: 40%+1-10% of 35
Perhaps I'm just dense or maybe its just the cold, but I'm not following what you're trying to do with these numbers. Without getting too deep into math - I don't want to critisize specific numbers as details like those can always be tweaked, but in your example what product am I delivering (slice range or whatever) to my customers if I'm using all 99% equipment, or random 50% WUKs (cause i'm not a weaponsmith) and 99%, or even 80% slicing tools? And to pull in on of my questions from before how would a Slicer with perfect tools compare to a Master Smuggler with decent tools (say 75 or 80% expermented)?
I think experimentation on slicing tools is an awesome idea. Sure it will be a little bit harsh for up and coming smugglers to compete in tool production. But, there is nothing to say that slice 4 smugglers cannot purchase clamps and knives from master smugglers. Then they will still be in the same slicing league as we have now.
This will give masters the ability to sell their ultra high quality tools to non-master smugglers. Some masters will choose to seek out the high quality resources, others will just buy high quality tools form these master smuggler (crafters).
Also, I only see this as an improvement with the Imperial Crackdown coming. People will not want to take the risk of being scanned for only a 10-25% sliced item (thus making them even more useless than they are now). But I bet a lot more people would be willing to risk carrying around a 25-35% item. As a smuggler I want to be there to offer high end slices.
Is the aim of experimentation simply to raise the minimum* slice % give good quality tools?
If this is the aim then what range are we talking about for tools made from average materials? Higher then the worst tools you can make? How much of a difference will there be in the range of a 'good' set of tools, a 'great' set of tools and a 'perfect' set of tools be? Is there enough room in the eqaution for perfect tools to really make a visible difference to our customers? Will those 'good' tools that might get and average of 0.5-1% lower slice then the best be so readily and easily made that all we're really asking for here is a bump to the minimum slice value at master and that can be done with or without experimentation if the devs are ok with these higher values?
*I used minimum here, but my question is valid for minimun, max, range, or anything that isn't some weighting scheme inside a fixed % range.
I'd like to know how many Masters support experimentation, vs slice 4 dabbling weaponsmiths. If I wanted to be a resource slave I would have kept MWS when I had it.
The reasons I'm AGAINST slice tool experimentation:
1. We are not artisans, we are "hackers". We are able to work with what's at hand to get the job done. We're more like McGuiver than any crafting class. Keep it that way.
2. Experimentation will favor dabblers and rob Masters of their clear superiority in slicing. Every master weaponsmith with stockpiles ofuber OQ/CD copper will pick up slice 4 and slice their own weapons.
3. Prices will go up up up. With 90 resource units per clamp... and given the 20+CPU cost on weapons, expect 95%+ clamps to sell for 2k each.
4. We will further confuse our customers with conflicting claims of superiority. As long as the end result is random customers will not have a good idea of who is the better slicer overall... someone with better skills or someone with better tools.
COME ON PEOPLE! BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR! LOOK AT THE H E L L THAT IS WEAPONSMITH... DO YOU REALLY WANT TO PLAY THAT GAME?
After alot of thought and discussion in the debate thread, i am gonna have to go with No Experiementation on Slicing. While my mind was changed on Spices, slicing does not havetheneed, or the same reasons, to have this aspect added to it. It will not encourage compitition, only raise the investment to all be the same.
It does not have the potential for diveristy that Spice does. Experimentation or not.
The more I think about it the more I'm against it without a revamp of slicing. I have always felt that smugglers were not a full blown crafting class. In fact, I fall more in line with the combat smuggler than the businessman smuggler. I believe that experimentation only on tools that we make should affect the work that we do.
I would be much more open to experimentation if the schematics for the kits were moved to slice II and slice III.
RaiCella wrote:
I'd like to know how many Masters support experimentation, vs slice 4 dabbling weaponsmiths. If I wanted to be a resource slave I would have kept MWS when I had it.
The reasons I'm AGAINST slice tool experimentation:
1. We are not artisans, we are "hackers". We are able to work with what's at hand to get the job done. We're more like McGuiver than any crafting class. Keep it that way.
2. Experimentation will favor dabblers and rob Masters of their clear superiority in slicing. Every master weaponsmith with stockpiles ofuber OQ/CD copper will pick up slice 4 and slice their own weapons.
3. Prices will go up up up. With 90 resource units per clamp... and given the 20+CPU cost on weapons, expect 95%+ clamps to sell for 2k each.
4. We will further confuse our customers with conflicting claims of superiority. As long as the end result is random customers will not have a good idea of who is the better slicer overall... someone with better skills or someone with better tools.
COME ON PEOPLE! BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR! LOOK AT THE H E L L THAT IS WEAPONSMITH... DO YOU REALLY WANT TO PLAY THAT GAME?
Rai,
Number 1, I'm no dabbler. I am working to become a Master Smuggler and a Master Weaponsmith both. My goal is to run guns that I make and slice for the Rebellion. That's been my intention all along. That I'm not AT that level yet does not somehow invalidate my opinions nor does it make me a dabbler. (apologies if you weren't referring to me)
Number 2, experimentation alone will not harm masters nor will it favor dabblers. Experimentation will BENEFIT masters if it's done the way weaponsmiths have to deal with it, because masters will be able to experiment MORE than novices. Personally I think that sucks. However, even if experimentation is left at 10 points for everyone starting at novice, you can easily set the system up where, no matter how good your resources are, a Slicer will never be able to outslice a Master, unless the master is lazy and uses freakin' lead to make his knives. And that's if we're using a modified version of the existing system where knives alone control the outcome. Unless you have experimentation set up such that the experimented tools alone control the outcome of your slice (rather than your base ability as determined by your level PLUS some calculation based on your tool quality), dabblers will not be able to beat masters. Again, unless the master sits on his ass and does nothing to improve his lot in life.
Number 3, experimenting should NEVER come into play with clamps or FANs. They are strictly binary tools. The outcomes that they offer are "Red/Blue" and that's it. Plus, their descriptions pretty much tell you their effectiveness. Clamps are supposed to guarantee that you successfully slice the item. That should NEVER change and I don't think ANYONE here was suggesting that.
Number 4, confusing customers happens all the time. All it takes is some jackass telling peope he can guarantee a 40% speed slice and someone out there will believe him.
Number 5, smuggler is nothing like, nor would it EVER be like weaponsmith. Weaponsmithing is a **edit** and a half. You have TONS of specific named resources to keep track of, they spawn VERY rarely so you're often playing either commodities broker or wandering prospector, etc. It's like having a second job (if indeed one has a first job). I'm guessing based on your posts that you haven't done much crafting outside of the smuggling tree. That's cool, not everyone does. But believe me, it is NOT hard to come by good quality OQ/CD copper. Sure, you jump in it when you see double 900s values, but even so, copper is mostly high quality. The probelm that weaponsmiths face is that they have to find specific TYPES of copper (IE: Mythra copper) for specific items. As long as the schematics we'd be making (and if we're working off of knives only here, the schematic is VERY forgiving) only require "copper" and not a particular type of copper, or even just require "metal" and not even ferrous vs. non-ferrous metal, we'll be in fat city. I can walk out of my house on Talus and trip over a good quality copper spawn. You can go to ANY planet and find high quality copper. Believe me, it's not hard at all. Yes, we're not pure crafters, but trust me, this would be crafting-lite in the extreme.
Prices would not go up either, and if the prices for copper did, so what? We build it into the slice. As long as the slice is seen by the market as worthwhile, they'll pay for it. Besides, we're already making a crapload of profit as it is. What, now you want to be PAID the way weaponsmiths are? 
If you haven't played weaponsmith, you have no IDEA what kind of hell it is. It is a **edit** and a half, as I said. Depending on how you do it, you spend TONS of time working on just gathering the **edit** resources. Your overhead is pretty high (which is why weapons are so expensive), and you have to deal with plenty of broken schematics, screwed up experimentation values, etc., etc., etc.
Tying tool quality (and thus OQ/CD for resources) to slice outcome is hardly the same thing. We'd be NOTHING like weaponsmiths. Trust me.
Now, I will say this. I think that slicing is good as it is. The main issue that I have is the randomness of it, but I've learned to deal with that and to educate my customers. I'd love to find a way to make it more predictable, but there's a certain liberation that comes from being able to shrug your shoulders at a customer and say "Sorry man. It's random, like I said." I support maintaining the randomness of slicing.
However, I think that, come the crackdown, we're going to need to make slicing more appealing to players. It has to be worthwhile for them to take the risk, and the potential for a 12% slice on my uber 1337 krayt whatever is not going to do it. I'll buy powerups where I KNOW what I'm getting AND it's not illegal.
That's why I think that the system I proposed, while more resource intensive (potentially, anyway) than what we have now, would cover all our bases. Tool quality would count so hard work would as well. Quality tools would help you boost your range to make slicing more appealing to other players. Masters would still maintain dominance, but not to the point where no one would ever be useful at slice 2, 3, or 4. And a lazy-ass master who figured "Ah screw it. I'll just use iron this time" would get what he deserves: a crappy slice, where at the same time the diligent slicer or diligent master would outstrip him.
I don't believe that minor tweaks to the existing system will do it, really. I think it'll be pointless, in the end, and people won't be satisfied anyway. A major revamp would work, but that will obviously take time. Regardless, I think that it's possible to redesign slicing to the point where experimentation helps EVERYONE, where those who put in MINIMAL effort will get maximal results (and as I said, assuming all tools work the same way as our current ones, it WOULD be minimal effort), and where slicing becomes an attractive service in a post-crackdown galaxy.
But I do agree with people that our current system, even if tweaked, just wouldn't do it, really. We need a full overhaul or we should just leave it the hell alone.
Well, for my proposal, that's where the base plus modifiers comes in. Your slicing base is the same as it is now. That won't change. It's not like anyone would get WORSE slices than they do now as a result of switching to my system. The only difference would be that people COULD get better slices, depending on what quality tools they used.
Now, I didn't go into resource breakdowns or what qualities of resources would be considered in final products for my optional tools largely because a.) I hadn't bothered to think anything up, and b.)I think that that's splitting hairs too soon. Right now, the discussion is kind of "big picture" and that's how I presented my plan mostly.
I think part of the problem here is that, because many of us here are combat smugglers (as opposed to crafting smugglers), we're not all as familiar with the crafting system. Let me try to explain that a bit better for those who don't craft regularly or who don't craft in a profession where resource quality counts for much.
There are two phases of crafting: assembly and experimentation. BOTH are affected by your resource quality, but in different ways.
Assembly determines how well you make the item off the bat. Let's take a laser knife, for example, and compare two assembly sessions.
Smuggler A makes his laser knife with iron, a notoriously low conductivity mineral. Smuggler B makes his laser knife with copper, a high conductivity mineral. Both use identical crafting tools and stand next to the same crafting station. Both dump their resources into the hopper, click "assemble" and wait.
Smuggler A's result is a "dismal failure". The overall quality (the only quality line for knives) is approximately 3%. Why? Because he used iron with a conductivity of 73. Smuggler B's result is a "great success". The overall quality of his knife is 48%. Now, at this point, they can either make a prototype, make a schematic, or experiment. Both choose to experiment.
We're now in phase two. In this phase, the smugglers have the opportunity to boost the stats of the item they're crafting, while they also have the potential to royally screw up what they've made. Experimentation is always a gamble in this regard. For purposes of this illustration, let's assume that both smugglers have an equal number of experimentation points.
Smuggler A dumps all his experimentation points in and receives an "amazing success". The quality of his knife is raised from 3% to an astonishing 12%. Wow. Smuggler B dumps all his experimentation points in and receives a "good success". The quality of his knife rises precipitously to 53%. Low results for both. But examine the following: one got an amazing success and only went so far. the other had a good success and didn't see much improvement either. why is this? Because of the resources they put in in the assembly phase. If you put crap into your schematics, no amount of experimentation will provide you with a quality item. There's only so far experimentation can take you. Also, certain qualities affect how well you can experiment, even if those qualities do not affect assembly. So, conductivity may count for assembly, but if your resources lack the qualities that lead to good experimentation, you may be better off just taking your great success assembly and not experimenting at all.
So, how would experimenting affect slicing?
Generally speaking, experimentation means that tool quality counts. If tool quality counts, that means better tools lead to better slices. Now, most smugglers probably DON'T want a system where you HAVE to get quality resources in order to slice at the CURRENT rates. That'd be a nerf, no question. That's why I proposed my front-end/back-end system, which distinguishes between your base skills and the optional enhancements you can produce. In terms of base skills, nothing would change. You'd NEVER be able to slice lower than the low end of your base. Ever. Period. End of discussion. What you COULD do, however, is tighten the range in which you operate, and possibly extend that range. Basically, increase the low end and increase the high end of your range, depending on the tools you use.
Just in a very basic, generic sense, this could be done the same way that knives have quality ratings currently. One line of improvement during the experimentation phase, one aspect that is affected by resource quality. And that's it. Overall quality is your determining factor. So, let's say you're talking about a tool that both increases your low end and increases your high end. You could make the ratio for improvements always the same, say, a 2:1 ratio. So if the max quality that you can get (a full 100% assembled/experimented tool) is 10%:5%, and you have a 75% tool, your improvement would be 7.5% on the low end, and 3.75% on the high end. Your slicing range would therefore move by that amount. So if you were slicing at 10% bottom end, and 25% top end, your range would now be 17.5% bottom end, and 28.75% top end. With a 100% tool, though, you'd get 20% minimum, and a 30% maximum. Where you landed within that range would still be random, but your results would improve.
Thus, under my proposed system, randomness would still be a factor (to reflect that slicing's an art form, not a science), but the tools you'd be using and their quality would have a positive effect on the outcome of your slice, even if it wouldn't necessarily allow you to say "I can guarantee that you'll get a 40% slice." Leave that kind of definite answer to the folks making powerups.
What do all these folks who are for the idea expect the end product to look like with these new experimented tools. It just all sounds like a lot of work to still hand back a pre-nerf scatter pistol to my customer with a 15% speed slice and charge them 3-5k for the priveledge.
If we're talking revamp, lets talk revamp. I have a few ideas for tools that will help me along as well (posted before about a revised clamp that allows you to choose what type of slice but as a tradeoff isn't 100% success) and allow me to sell a better service to a customer. But I didn't think this pole was asking if someone wanted a complete overhaul or not, rather tweak what we have by the introduction of experimenting on existing tools. Its here that I just haven't seen any proposals for how quality would have an impact on the ranges we know. Since this range is pretty small already and there are already factors of randomness and skill level involved I'm not seeing where or how tool quality has room to fit in. Sure its a nice marketing tool, and I really don't have a problem with finding the resources, and as I mentioned earlier there still will be lots of room for crap tools (containers + grinding). I just want someone to step up and tell me what the hell we're voting on.
Well, contrary to my opinion on spices, I'm actually for slicing experimentation. Contrary to spices, it involves a single resource, that is easier to track than multiple resources for multiple spices.
There remains the fact that we have no control over AUKs or WUks (Not all of us are MW 
) so there should be an indicator of effectiveness clearer than what it currently is.
I'd say you'd have to mitigate slice % with something like 25% WUK quality, 25% knife quality, 50% clamp quality, 40% FAN quality. The latter two not stackable of course. Leave some randomness in it to get the following figures. (Keeping with a max 35% slice)
- WUK 100% quality: 20%+1-5% of 35
- Knife 100% quality: 20%+1-5% of 35
- Clamp 100% quality: 40%+1-10% of 35
- WUK 50% quality and under: +5% slice
- knife 50% and under: +5% slice
- Clamp 50% and under: +5% slice
That gives a 15%-35% slice range as it is now, except if you put work into it you'll likely never get those blaster 15% slices at master. (Didn't do the whole math, I'll let the professionals do that )
- Have slicing use the experimentation interface so we CAN try and pick or mix n' match but still could suffer a crit failure.
- Solo's method listed here.
Certification for tools (Clamps/FAN's/another enhanced tool of some kind) is also a good plan.