Weaponsmith Archive
Thread: Weaponsmithing Enhancement Comprehensive List (Data Gathering Thread)
Takko.... lets do a little more data collecting post publish then recomplie this, and I will change the sticky....
Sound good?
Anymore dropped enhancements to add post patch?
Not sure if this is where I should put that, but here's an idea:
We can all agree that guns with more identical power handlers are harder to make. We can all agree that for example DX2 pistol should be better than FGW5. I think these guns should actually benefit from having multiple power handlers. I have heard this debate has happened already, but hear me out. I don't think the power handlers' bonuses should add up linearly. Rather, the first power handler would add 100% of its dmg and speed values, the second maybe 50%, the third 50% of the second one, so in respect to first one that would be 25%, then 12.5% and so on. With 11 power handlers on t21 you would get 200% more than base damage of a power handler. I guess the base dmaage for multi-power handler weapons would have to be reduced, but I think such exponentially smaller contribution of each power handler would still reward the people who make good components and also reward putting krayt tissue in wepons with multiple power handlers. Right now it doesn't make sense that FGW5 is practically the best pistol on the market because it only requires one power handler.
I made a table that calulates these number but couldn't post it here.The first couple of handlers contribute the most, yet the last still contribut some and might be worth pursuing. These calculations are based on each handler contributing 0.5 of the previous one. That can be increased or decreased, butI think 0.5 is pretty much correct. The contrib dmg row shows how much dmage based on a +36 power handler each unit contributes. Note that ona t21 rifle the cumulative damage increase would be 71, which I think is acceptable for such a weapon. With a crappy power handler of 28, the cumulative contribution for t21 would be 56 dmg. The speed column tells the same story.
i think such a system would be beneficial, as it would increase the value of multi-power handler weapons, which are harder to make anyway. It would provide more options for people to choose which gun to buy. right now the choice in
Not to discredit your work in anyway, when you compare the fwg5 to the dx2 you are actually comparing apples to oranges. The dx2 has armor piercing and does acid damage (which if I am not mistaken - fewer mobs have protection against this). The fwg5 does heat damage (which I believe is more protected against by mobs) and has no armor piercing at all. The fwg5 is accurate out to about 20m more or less, but the dx2 is designed for short range combat. The simple difference in the type of damage may explain the general speed difference between the 2 weapons as a balancing mechanism (the fwg5 generally is .5 faster than the dx2). Now I am just a weaponsmith and don't know if the armor piercing actually works or the special resistances actually work, but I believe this is the intended final result.With very few exceptions, weapons that use multiple powerhandlers have armor piercing values and weapons that use a single handler do not. This fact alone is sufficient to explain away the differences between weapon types.
In contrast, however, your work is entirely appropriate to similarly situated weapons say for example the dxr6 and elite carbines. I believe the dxr6 requires 5 handlers and the elite requires 4, but damage experimentation resultsare relatively the sameexcept the elite seems to be a littlefaster. They both do energy damage; they both have the same armor piercing values. The only difference seems to be in the range mods and ideal range settings,yet the differences are minor more or less making the dxr6 less desireable to produce than the elite. Here, the additional power handler should make more of an impact in the schematic desgin.
Yes, I am aware of the armor piercing and damage type. The simple truth is, most players online don't have a clue about it and I am just getting sick of spending 15 minutes explaining. I would rather the gun showed its value when you examine it, instead of needing all the background information. A table listing the values of dmg against armor in the examine window would help. That way I don't have to send my time explaining things to stupid 1337 d00dz.
I still think the multiple power handlers should give a gun an edge, regardless od damage type. It needs balancing, but if you go to all the trouble of making identical components and such, you should be able to make a sale. Instead, guns like Power5 and SR pistol are pretty much dead.
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=weaponsmith&message.id=17078&page=2
But I think it would a good Enhancement for the Weaponsmith in General.
The Problem of so many Weaponsmiths grinding to Master is that the current design of the profession implies, that you need to get Master before you can create viable weapons.
I thought a bit about it and found a simple solution.
Here are the facts:
1. We all seem to agree, that the main problem is, that experimentation means anything for a good weapon (besides the resources, but thats not skill specific).
2.Problem is, that the Novice Weaopnsmith gets 1 Experimentation Point, expert gets 6 and Master gets 9, thats a 900% increase opposed to Novice and 50% to expert.
So what about changing the boni you get with the Techniques Line ?
My proposal is:
Novice: Experimentation +30
Crafting Techniques I: Experimentation +15
Crafting Techniques II: Experimentation +15
Crafting Techniques III: Experimentation +10
Crafting Techniques IV: Experimentation +10
Master: Experimentation +10
This results in the novice getting 3 experimentation points, with crafting II you get 6, with expert 8 and with Master the 9 you got before, but the scaling is much better. Bonus to Weapon Crafting should stay the same.
An expert Crafter would then can experiment nearly as good as a Master, resulting in nearly the same quality weapons. Even Novice Weapons would be much better than before.
The benefit for getting Master is now not extraordinary better experimentation, but getting new Schematics and bonus to crafting, hopefully resulting in fewer Failures. The one point in experimentation could be the edge to create the unique weapon a master is know for.
Pros of this solution
1. Very simple change (I would assume change in one DB-Table, made in less than 5 minutes for Devs)
2. Nobody gets "nerfed", Masters stay basicly the same (no Schematics drops or other restrictions as in other ideas to fix the problem).
3. You can create viable weapons with some skill in crafting techniques and even novice creates much better weapons. Expert Smiths now have a market chance.
4. Non-Master Weaponsmiths can start creating Weapons on an earlier stage of their training, sell them and engage in the Weaponcrafting trade much earlier (and have more fun I assume, no more extensive Grinding)
Contras:
1. Masters are not the only to create good weapons, the market for expert or lower weapons is now open. So everybody who is now master gets more competition.
But you now not need to be a master and therefore I predict a drop in Masters, because you can skill one or two lines up, depending on what you want to craft and drop the other lines, so Master Weaponcrafter gets
more unique and you will get a better market for high-level weapons.
Any comments on this ?
Hmm.... the thought has merit I'll give it that but you have to consider that our experimentation line is the same for many other crafters as well. And while I admit that such a change would increase the versatility and the economy of the weapons out there, how would such a change effect the game as a whole?
For example, how many weapons are made out there thatdo notneed a master weaponsmith? Take carbines. The elite carbine that a master can make is often less used because it has less armor penetration than that of the laser carbine and has a higher max damage. Very important factors in many of the customer's eyes these days. Especially since slicing weapons is based on a percentage so you get a better over all damage increase per percentage point of slicing.
Ok, so what?
Well, the market would not be affected by this change that you suggest at least of the carbiners' of the world, so why bother to spend points, time, and effort just to get that last point of experimentation?
The other thing one has to take into account is that where one change is made, ALL have to be changed. That means all the armorsmiths, bio-engineers, droid engineers, ect, would have to have the new experimentation line as well. Which in itself looks all right, but think about the number of master crafters that would vanish from the world... (as I say this I'm thinking maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing...) and the increase of dabblers. Thats what would hurteveryprofession so much. There would no longer be the sacrifice of skill necessary to construct a truly potent item when the skill lines offer so many alternatives that are just as powerful to the customer as a master weapon schematic.
The Devs made crafting a profession for those dedicated enough to complete it. A masterweaponsmithjust wouldn't have the... prestige if so many took up the skill as just a hobby.
Samriis (2-4-4-4)
Tarquinas
Jenner - Master Weapon Smith - Kuari
the guns that benefit from both the high speed feeder and the krayt tisse (or high energy capacitor) are:
FWG5
Launcher Pistol
Scatter Pistol
.