Weaponsmith Archive
Thread: New crafting, what you DONT know.
Message Edited by EEMAN on 03-17-2004 10:00 AM
i guess the only issue u mention that i will, well, take issue with is mentioned in item #3.
I've always been under the impression, under the original system of crafting, that not all great results are the same. I guess i just figured that the same thing was going on under the 1 day patch rules.
Am I on crack?
kingvidiot wrote:
i guess the only issue u mention that i will, well, take issue with is mentioned in item #3.
I've always been under the impression, under the original system of crafting, that not all great results are the same. I guess i just figured that the same thing was going on under the 1 day patch rules.
Am I on crack?
sorta heh, the final combine percentage is based on quality of resources and always was. In the old system a 29% combine allowed 10 points to be spent into a single line at 7% gains bringing you to 99%. If you had 12 points you could not ever reach 100% because of the resource gate. An 11% combine did not let you spend 10 points on a single line , therefore 11% barely hit around 60% with left over points to spend elsewhere. The new systemw as designed to still reach 60% but take 10 points to do it. It was not intended to go beyond the 60% resource gate with the 2 remaining points. In the new system they softened the resource gate a little by design so 28% could get to 100%with an amazing success etc. Making power handlers w/ 21% combines should get me close to their old stats w/ all 10 points and 8 times out of 10 I am stopped from spending the other 2 points. IT is a bug and exploit because SOMETIMES you can spend 12 points. If it were by design and as you say 'some experiments do better for same reply' then you would always be able to spend 12 points on a single line and not run into a resource gate. IF i were to get 2 amazing successes in a row I would cap at 10 points and have to spend the other 2 points elsewhere with LOWER results than if I got 1 amazing success on a 3pt experiment followed by 2pt experiments always leaving 1 box empty. The fact that doing tricky experiments allows you to spend 12 points on a single line to take 22% all the way to 100% is an exploit of the math.
Basically what I am seeing is that every experiment run the system was calculating the percentage gain based on the quality of resources. This math was then rounded to a fixed digit decimal value and processed against the success roll. Because this rounding appears to be happening every roll we are observing different results for every roll albeit marginal. When the right combination of percentages occur the stats on the weapon and the percentages exceed the resource gate and once that occurs you can continue spending the rest of your points (all 12) on the same line of experimentation. This is the exact same bug that allowed some crafters to make weapons +30 in damage and -3 in speed faster giving the illusion of krayt tissues being used. See the thread titled 'insane success bug' or something along those lines for a further explanation of that particular bug. This is also the same bug that allowed us to get 40 point weapon stocks regardless of wood quality previously as outlined on a different thread. Ironic it is that this new system was supposedly mandatory to fix the bug in the weapon stocks yet it seems that instead this bug exists on every line of crafting now and not just limited to weapon stocks.
in the 'oh by the way' category my advanced weapon stocks are now
min damage 40
max damage 40
speed 0.281
I can also make37 37 0.189 with different tricks.
i think i understand wut u r saying. if i am using resourses who's stats are all 750, then i should only be able to experiment upto 75%? is that the just of it?
So the patch was broken to begin with?
wut a mess.............
FYI. I did an experiment using only 10 points on both the vibro motor and the VK. And I came up with one point better in Damage. I didn't even use the extra 2 points in this test. The range modifier was 8 in difference with the same speed.
2- I have seen a lot of comparison of VK's using old vibro motors etc. This is obsurd to use as so-called evidence. Hybrid components is taking the best of both systems. Ofcourse your results are better, its far from imperical evidence. USE YOUR HEAD before jumping to conclusions.
- Novice level schems can have a max of 5 exp blocks (ie 5 blocks is all this item will except, the rest are lost)
- Intemidiate level schems ............max of 6 exp blocks
- Advanced level.............................max of 7 exp blocks
- Expert level ....................................max of9 exp blocks
- Master level and MWS level would be unlimited
This setup would allow ajourneyman crafterto build a low-enditem on par with a master , but with greater difficulty. The schems would need to have their experimental ranges adjusted so the stats dont change from current items, but I hope you all understand the basic concept.
Logix wrote:
Be advised when throwing around the e-word, especially in the sense that we were given an opportunity to test every aspect of this code. This is just a situation in which we are dealing with bugs to test their code and it was precedented. There's no way around this bug, unfortunately, and to test it we have to experience it. It doesn't make someone an exploiter, it makes them a .. beta tester. :>
I think everyone has gotten a bit gunshy with that word, yes. I never meant to imply anyone was an exploiter, but I do know that operating outside the design parameters is for lack of a better word, an exploit. When we leave our vehicles out at the starport (possibly because we forget) and then store them on another planet, thereby restoring to full condition, we are exploiting. When somene stops and starts dancing in a macro to get past the flourish timer so a musician/dancer buff takes a matter of seconds instead of 8 minutes, we are expoiting. Heck, when your driving your car and you take a turn down a side street to avoid a long line at an upcomming traffic light you are , in a sense, exploiting. Some exploits we can live with, others we cannot and are considered game breaking. Getting a 1000 max damage CDEF pistol from a multi-slicing ring is definitely game breaking. Its possible to play the game every day and yet use an exploit completely without your knowlege. For example, our master doc/master CM kept dropping her resources in her backpacks that float in her house letting them auto-combine as she dropped them. She did not know this lowers your house inventory count every time you do it untill you re-open that pack. She constantly was getting messages she had too many items and when checking discovered she had 33 more items than she should have had.
Nodoby is going to get banned here, esp for testing a system the devs asked us to test. I guess the SOE definition of Exploiter differs from logic in that in this case Exploiter doesnt mean just 'one who exploits' but more along the line of consciously using an exploit for personal gain to imbalance the gameplay to the players advantage. However I do agree Logix that some people are definitely gunshy to that word. I mearly meant to imply that the devs will see it as an exploit and because of such it will have ahigher priority to get fixed and didnt want these 'petitioners' for the new system to base their votes on results that given a couple hotfixes will be much different than what they got.
Message Edited by EEMAN on 03-18-2004 09:09 AM
EEMAN wrote:
3- This is paramount. You are exploiting and dont even know it. The fact that the results are HIGHLY inconsistent should give you a clue here. There isnt some random number generator at work. This is MATH and should ALWAYS end up the same when the results of experimenting are the same. One can argue in the new system that a 29% assembly can be crafted to 100%. However, one CANNOT argue that taking a 21% and 24% assembly parts to 100% is working as intended. There is a rounding error that occurs which is allowing us to exceed the resource gate. This is why sometimes you hit the cap at 10 points with 2 left over and other times you can spend all 12 points on damage. The rounding error occurs when the should-be final experiment causes the stats to go beyond the resource gate.
Be advised when throwing around the e-word, especially in the sense that we were given an opportunity to test every aspect of this code. This is just a situation in which we are dealing with bugs to test their code and it was precedented. There's no way around this bug, unfortunately, and to test it we have to experience it. It doesn't make someone an exploiter, it makes them a .. beta tester. :>
That aside, I completely agree with everything else you said in #3. This system is bugged because of the exact reasons stated. Folks, your results are inconsistent and inaccurate, do not take them to imply realistic results with this system. The rounding error is atrociously apparent in every experimentation attempt and it is granting significantly higher maxes than what should be happening. Your resource max is not supposed to exceedits predetermined figurewithout amazing success, but it is.
Simply because something is catering towards your benefit does not mean that it's flawless and works for the greater good of the system. Try to think objectively.
Parsifal_Nightstalker wrote:
Please see my other post regarding how I managed to equal 12-point stats on blaster power handlers using 10 experimentation points and a combination of consumables. I'm tired and don't feel like repeating myself - you're only considering the tip of the iceberg in this thread - think deeper.
You posted this exact same line in several other threads, but your anecdote was nothing more than exceptionally vague. You had a "combination of consumables"that granted a greater advantage than they did prior to the patch. Additionally, you noted that you could not match the stats on every attempt. You didn't post experimentation method, you didn't post your number of attempts, you didn't post your stats of your handlers or the stats of the resources, you didn't post what affect the food had, etc. If you want to withhold information in order to keep the advantage to yourself, that's perfectly within your right. But expecting everyone else to accept it as valid data when it's intentionally vague is unlikely to happen. Without elaboration, there is no way possible to determine if yourstatsare genuinely accurateor if they are another fluke tied into the rounding errors.
I also found that if I use a lower quality polymer in the adv power handlers, I got better results. That doesn't make sense.