Weaponsmith Archive
Thread: more tarq crafting past damage caps
heres another thread for reference.
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=weaponsmith&message.id=93254
no feasible explanation?
doesn't bother anyone else that we have a crafter repeatedly making weapons past damage caps the rest of us must adhere to?
id be pretty concerned. if its happening on a tiny server like tarquinas, it has to be happening elsewhere too.
Heh, sorry had to laugh; if even 50% of things that happen in this game had a feasible explanation we wouldn't have anything to burn hours off our life discussing now would we?
Does it make sensethat DE-10's using pre-cu barrels can be crafted past the suggested damage caps?
Does it make sense that ANY pre-CU weapon's whatsoever converted past the damage caps?
that should be easy enough to determine. has anyone in the game crafted a hammer past the 1184 by using a precu acklay bone? what about HLR's, do they have some mythical pre cu loot that lets them get crafted past the cap?
im not sure how relevant precu weapons converting past cap is to this weapon though, since it was just made. cute pic too, this one was 1250 though.
noSup4u wrote:
that should be easy enough to determine. has anyone in the game crafted a hammer past the 1184 by using a precu acklay bone? what about HLR's, do they have some mythical pre cu loot that lets them get crafted past the cap?
im not sure how relevant precu weapons converting past cap is to this weapon though, since it was just made. cute pic too, this one was 1250 though.
has anyone in the game crafted a hammer past the 1184 by using a precu acklay bone?
you seem very insistant that these are suggested caps.
when you craft using a pre cu acklay bone and break the damage cap then damage slice it, shouldnt you get an error that says this item is past the damage cap and therefore can't be sliced?
your attitude seems extremely defensive and somewhat confrontational as well. i am trying to determine how this is happening and why there is only one smith on one server where it has been repeatedly documented.
it would be nice if it were only pre cu acklay bones as thats a convenient and perhaps legitimate reason but this has happened with several rifles as well. pre cu acklay only having this happen would at least be a limiting scenario, where eventually there would be no more about this, but it seems to keep coming up on our server with one crafter and other weapons as well.
XrioT wrote:
if someone were to find a way to initiate this damage cap breaking mechanism then the suggested caps would be irrelevant.
noSup4u wrote:
you seem very insistant that these are suggested caps.
when you craft using a pre cu acklay bone and break the damage cap then damage slice it, shouldnt you get an error that says this item is past the damage cap and therefore can't be sliced?
your attitude seems extremely defensive and somewhat confrontational as well. i am trying to determine how this is happening and why there is only one smith on one server where it has been repeatedly documented.
it would be nice if it were only pre cu acklay bones as thats a convenient and perhaps legitimate reason but this has happened with several rifles as well. pre cu acklay only having this happen would at least be a limiting scenario, where eventually there would be no more about this, but it seems to keep coming up on our server with one crafter and other weapons as well.
"im not sure how relevant precu weapons converting past cap is to this weapon though, since it was just made. cute pic too, this one was 1250 though."
I'm confrontational? Was that not intended to provoke confrontation? You know full well being a WS that any weapon over the damage cap should be considered, whether it's 1250 or 1190.
If you're really on a mission to find out what happened and aren't just trying to bring the 'tarq-drama' to another forum, then factually, here is what we have to work with:
A ) Whether or not you should get a message when slicing a weapon with a pre-cu acklay bone is moot. We have examples above that defy this logic.
B )Wehave a singlescreenshot of a rifle that had this happen; (Now if there is proof this has happened to several rifles?please enlighten us.)
C ) We have two screenshots of Power hammers that have had this happen and have 'heard' that it happens to DE-10's that use pre-cu barrels.
D ) All of these weapons use enhancers.
E ) All of these weapons are sliced.
F ) We only have damage cap breaking examples
G ) We know that pre-cu weapons had the capability to pass damage caps, how this was calculated is beyond our knowledge.
Now logically, here are a couple of possible theories.
With respect to enhancers. Lets assume that the code to determine if a weapon is past the damage cap doesn't apply to pre-cu enhancers. Now when converting weapons for the CU, we know that none of the unenhanced weapons will be a problem because there damage can only be so high without enhancers, so what we do is implement a mechanism that strictly checks if the weapon has an enhancer, and we set the weapons 'void_cap' attribute to 'true'. Now in ourcode (since we obviously intend to break the 'hard caps' with enhanced weapons), we don't enforce the same cap if the weapon has 'void_cap' set to 'true', meaning all enhanced weapons have the potential of breaking this cap.
Now in theory, if the code to set a weapons 'void_cap' attribute to 'true' was attached to the pre-cu enhancers (because we are trying to avoid scanning the HUGE database of weapons),there is the potential that any weapon using one of these pre-cu components will have this 'void_cap' attribute attached, which allows the weapon to craft past the cap post-cu!
With respect to slicing: Further utilizing the theory above, if slicing caps are enforced on a weapon by using the same caps table (with an additional formula that makes up the slicing cap end-value), the only way they could possibly be surpassed is if this 'void_cap' value is returning when a pre-cu enhanced weapon attempts to calculate against the table. In which case it again becomes possible to breach the cap.
Er... getting tired of typing, so here are the conclusions to the above theory (sorry no second theory-set tonight)
Conclusion: If the above theory is indeed correct, then only weapons crafted with pre-cu enhancers in a post-cu environment would see this result. And on top of that, these pre-cu enhancers would have to be worthy enough to reach near-cap in the first place to even see a possible slicing breach. So .. the limited quantity possible given the theory pales in comparison to the actual converted pre-cu items that breach the caps.
Well.. now that i'm completely non-confrontational after typing this in vein given my conclusion,
I extend my apoligize noSup4u for the harsh words..
X
Message Edited by XrioT on 10-07-2005 10:07 PM
I agree, if they plan on keeping the hard caps then they need to enforce them entirely, no exceptions. But honestly i'd rather see a mechanism in place like the diminishing returns one proposed, that lets everyone craft beyond cap.
noSup4u wrote:
XrioT wrote:
if someone were to find a way to initiate this damage cap breaking mechanism then the suggested caps would be irrelevant.
qfe
i think thats the problem.
hopefully im not the only person that has an issue with somebody finding ways to bypass damage caps. that was a significant purpose of the combat upgrade right? getting rid of exploited weapons by putting in caps?
i also thought the former correspondent said in an earlier thread concerning similar cap bypassing crafted weapons that the devs were putting code in place to check for any weapon past its cap and correcting it accordingly. hopefully this is still planned.
XrioT wrote:
I'm confrontational? Was that not intended to provoke confrontation?
i was not trying to provoke confrontation. i would have preferred you never saw this at all so i could get whatever you are doing removed from the game and any weapons that resulted from it as well. at least not until you tried to use an alt account to feed me bs and conceal your actions.
If you're really on a mission to find out what happened and aren't just trying to bring the 'tarq-drama' to another forum, then factually,
oh i want to find out whats going on,thats why im posting here. i dont want input from the person exploiting though, thats obviously a little biased and unnecessary.
Well.. now that i'm completely non-confrontational after typing this in vein given my conclusion,
I extend my apoligize noSup4u for the harsh words..
dont bother, i dont care.