Weaponsmith Archive
Thread: new crafting system tests here (added more tests)
Message Edited by Biggens77 on 03-16-2004 12:38 PM
Message Edited by Biggens77 on 03-16-2004 07:03 PM
Summary: promising change, needs work, would NOT have fixed economy.
I have to agree with Biggens.
Old vs New, +112 experiment +128 assembly, 39.45 Station, 14.79 tools, no other bonuses
ABPH : 21 41 -.42 vs 22 45 -.44 (and still not maxed out with 11 pts)
APFM 19 39 -.39 vs 20 41 -.41 (maxed out but took all 11pts)
One more pt of disturbance.
I experimented two pfm's the exact same way, same distribution, same 'results'. One came out 21 41 -.41 the other 20 40 -.41 maxed out ... more randomness ... ?
good job.
Yes I agree. This change would NOT have fixed the economy. That was our reasoning all along. Everyone calling us whiners saying the game was too easy didn't get the point.
If the devs had said they were doing this to make the game harder it would have been ok. However they said they were doing this to fix the economy and we told them over and over and over again that it would NOT.
atimes wrote:
good job.
Yes I agree. This change would NOT have fixed the economy. That was our reasoning all along. Everyone calling us whiners saying the game was too easy didn't get the point.
If the devs had said they were doing this to make the game harder it would have been ok. However they said they were doing this to fix the economy and we told them over and over and over again that it would NOT.
It would have helped the economy because reducing the overall capability of combat players to earn money doing missions. That's where the SW:G economy starts. When you can do 27K missions with ease because you're invincible with buffs/armor/weapons taht are ALL top of the line... you can just pump out the creds. And when EVERYONE can do taht with ease... you have a flood of credits entering your server.
And think of how much faster you can run mission with vehicles now vs. before. That's how it would help fix the economy. Would have it actually accomplished it? I don't know. But it would have hopefully stemmed the bleeding that is massive amounts of new credits entering the servers everyday.
MatchstickNaritus wrote:
atimes wrote:good job.
Yes I agree. This change would NOT have fixed the economy. That was our reasoning all along. Everyone calling us whiners saying the game was too easy didn't get the point.
If the devs had said they were doing this to make the game harder it would have been ok. However they said they were doing this to fix the economy and we told them over and over and over again that it would NOT.
It would have helped the economy because reducing the overall capability of combat players to earn money doing missions. That's where the SW:G economy starts. When you can do 27K missions with ease because you're invincible with buffs/armor/weapons taht are ALL top of the line... you can just pump out the creds. And when EVERYONE can do taht with ease... you have a flood of credits entering your server.
And think of how much faster you can run mission with vehicles now vs. before. That's how it would help fix the economy. Would have it actually accomplished it? I don't know. But it would have hopefully stemmed the bleeding that is massive amounts of new credits entering the servers everyday.
MatchstickNaritus wrote:
It would have helped the economy because reducing the overall capability of combat players to earn money doing missions. That's where the SW:G economy starts. When you can do 27K missions with ease because you're invincible with buffs/armor/weapons taht are ALL top of the line... you can just pump out the creds. And when EVERYONE can do taht with ease... you have a flood of credits entering your server.
And think of how much faster you can run mission with vehicles now vs. before. That's how it would help fix the economy. Would have it actually accomplished it? I don't know. But it would have hopefully stemmed the bleeding that is massive amounts of new credits entering the servers everyday.
MatchstickNaritus wrote:
It would have helped the economy because reducing the overall capability of combat players to earn money doing missions. That's where the SW:G economy starts. When you can do 27K missions with ease because you're invincible with buffs/armor/weapons taht are ALL top of the line... you can just pump out the creds. And when EVERYONE can do taht with ease... you have a flood of credits entering your server.
And think of how much faster you can run mission with vehicles now vs. before. That's how it would help fix the economy. Would have it actually accomplished it? I don't know. But it would have hopefully stemmed the bleeding that is massive amounts of new credits entering the servers everyday.
Sorry for the blank post.
You completely missed the point. Combat is not going to vary suddenly because you have a weapon that does 5 more pts damage vanilla, 15 more sliced, nor is PvP going to suddenly change, esp since the ranges just float for mitigation.
As it stands now, ANY character can come in and mission grind up to master marksman and will have money along the way to spend on top of the line armor and weapons - it is not a difficult deal to hit novice rifleman with a nice suit of composite and a nice T21. I've done it on an alt without a credit transfer.
Furthermore, final stats vary by 1-2 pts - regardless of how consistently you experiment. I've experimented with great successes all the way on ABPH - bread and butter component of blaster weapons - some weapons end up 22 44 -.44 some end up 21 44 -.41 and some end up 22 45 -.40 with a wide variety of every possible value in between. So right of the bat, I'm going to spend more time creating component schematics as a master.
Second, the final stats of a weapon also vary. Speed by +/- .1 and damage accordingly. I'm gettting laser rifles between 5.9 & 6.1 and max damage between 445 and 455 - again great successes but there's a variance in there somewhere - not sure if it is in how I distribute the points or how the results are coming back. So, doI make a 61. 445 or do I strive fopr a 5.9 455 - because that is what combat players will want? Again, I am spending more time trying to hit just the right schematic. Should it be this hard at master? I am of the opinion that is should not. There needs to be some consistency in somewhere in crafting.
The variance should come in choosing between a powerhammer that does 20-40 pts less damage but +20 to +50 more range mods (the high ends are rough extrapolations do not quote them as researched). I'll make weapons that are more accurate but less damage or more damage but less accurate all day long - but I don't want to go 5-10 tries to 'max' it out.
Which in turn raises the entire question on min-maxing: why does it matter? Any decent combat char is going to go for the lowest speed highest damage weapon everytime - and if it has any other benefits such as condition or range so much the better. What this means is Master will spend more time & resources trying to hit that ideal combination of speed & damage and Masters with +120 will still outstrip them by being able to throw at most 2 more points into range or condition.
In the end, the overall effect on crafting and the economy will not meet the stated design goal of fixing the economy.
This fix to crafting does however show promise. SOE should pursue this design decision further and refine it - with input from the community that will be using the system - and not in a vacuum.
However, regardless of which 'version' of the crafting fix that goes in, the economy will still not be entirely addressed. Novices will struggle, Masters will get by +120 Masters will rule servers and skilltapes will inflate while +120 Master weapons will probably do somewhat the same. If anything it will only break the economy.
The end result will effect you as the consumer - if a weaponsmith with a fat bankroll starts spending big money on Krayt, he's going to charge big money for Krayt Weapons. Those with the bankrolls already built up will be able to afford it, newer or intermediate players will not. There will be a sharp, jagged distinction between the super rich and everyone else, with no possible means of breaking in against more established business and players, short of demise.
MatchstickNaritus wrote:
It would have helped the economy because reducing the overall capability of combat players to earn money doing missions. That's where the SW:G economy starts. When you can do 27K missions with ease because you're invincible with buffs/armor/weapons taht are ALL top of the line... you can just pump out the creds. And when EVERYONE can do taht with ease... you have a flood of credits entering your server.
Message Edited by Jedi_Titus on 03-16-2004 03:36 PM
atimes wrote:
Where are these 27K missions. Please tell me so I can start doing them.
I have One BIG beef about the new changes that Purely DOESN'T make sense...
I'm crafting Advanced Blaster Power handlers on Lowca. i have +11 weapons experimentatin and +10 weapons assembly. When i experiment i experiment 4 boxes at a time.. using the same resources, same combine order, etc.
Combine 1: Great Success ...Experimentation: all great Successes.. Final outcome = 22, 44, -0.45 spd
Combine 2: Great Success... Experimentation: Great, Amazing, Great .. Final outcome = 21, 42, -0.41
Combine 3Amazing Success... Experimentation: Great Great Great, Final outcome = 22, 44, -0.44
I can't for the LIFE of me figure out why an amazing success would ever yield a WORSE product than something with all greats.