Is RE messed up AGAIN?

[HeavensAgent]

No, and the devs agree. They've already said they are aware that long failure streaks are likely if not a certainty given the number of players, and that they are looking into ways to avoid the issue of long streaks. Most likely they're debating whether or not keeping count of number of attempts on a per item basis in order to prevent people from exploiting the system by trying to RE an inexpensive item to get the odds up before trying to RE the expensive item you really are interest in is worth the additional size of the character in memory.

Claiming they agree is extremely deceptive. They're watching the system, as any designers worth their paychecks would do, but that does not mean they aren't happy with the current percentage. Additionally, they may have a very different idea of what constitutes a "long failure streak". Statistically, a 28-item gap in schematics is commonplace. You'd have to be looking at instances of several times that lengths, occurring with some frequency, in order to make a valid argument that the system is functioning in error.

 

They did say something about implementing them while still keeping the importance of crafters intact, which *strongly* suggests the means of obtaining them would involve crafters in some way.

This has been brought up twice now, but I've never seen it. Does anyone have a source?

[HeavensAgent]

I am not in favor of a huge boost to the regular RE %, but what about a 5% (or 10%) bonus chance to RE and item that you crafted with an augment slot?

 

So, if I make a lvl 23 pistol I have a 20% chance to RE to a blue, but if that green that I crafted ends up with an augment slot I get +5% to RE it. Gives a little (random) bonus to your REing, makes the augment slot a little more of a bonus when you do get it, and I do not think that would skew the overall results of long term REing very much.

This could work currently, but once Augment slots can be added after an item is created it would be a poor idea.

[GnatB]

Claiming they agree is extremely deceptive. They're watching the system, as any designers worth their paychecks would do, but that does not mean they aren't happy with the current percentage. Additionally, they may have a very different idea of what constitutes a "long failure streak". Statistically, a 28-item gap in schematics is commonplace. You'd have to be looking at instances of several times that lengths, occurring with some frequency, in order to make a valid argument that the system is functioning in error.

 

This has been brought up twice now, but I've never seen it. Does anyone have a source?

 

True, I *know* they said they were looking into a way to prevent "too long" streaks, which is the part I was agreeing with, not that they said any specific number of attempts (in this case 28) constituted such a "too long" streak. It's possible their cutoff will be 30 or 50 or 100 or 255 or 65535. (though I vaguely seem to remember the numbers in the thread the dev responded to were lower than 20)

[GnatB]

This has been brought up twice now, but I've never seen it. Does anyone have a source?

 

Google search FTW

Hey,

 

A bunch of you have brought up the point that reverse engineering orange quest item appearances would be a risky business.

 

That's true - which is why we did not enable reverse engineering for these. It would be pretty frustrating for players to destroy the quest reward they worked so hard to get for a chance at being able to craft the appearance.

 

Instead, many of the these appearances are now available through tradeable schematics found through mission discoveries.

 

Another clarification regarding augment slots:

 

In the mid-term (e.g. past Game Update 1.2), we are planning on adding means to the game that allow you to add augment slots to equipment you already have.

 

So while critical crafted appearances are the only source of augment slots in Game Update 1.2., this is a temporary arrangement that will change in the future when we implement means to retrofit existing gear (including social) with augment slots (without devaluing crafters in the process).

 

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=3535201#edit3535201

 

(edit: FWIW, that's actually a different quote talking about not able to RE quest schematics than the one I remember talking about not being able to RE orange ones in general)

Edited April 26, 2012 by GnatB

[Raeln]

I cannot see this at all. This would require significant changes to be made to the item modification system. How is an Aim or cunning Augment Slot going to restrict its availability to Aim or Cunning Augment Slots? How is it going to know what an Aim or Cunning Augment is in the first place? How about players that want to switch things up from time to time? Maybe swap out an Aim Augment for a Shield Augment? It would be a nightmare to code and implement.

 

Negative. Such a function already exists to separate heavy/medium armor from armormech and synthweaving. Armormechs create aim/cunning heavy/medium armors. Synthweaving create strength/willpower.

 

No, if the supposed "Augment Kits" are added to the game they're going to be generic, or perhaps limited to armor type (light, medium, heavy). Even if crafted, they're not going to be uncommon; how can you make a basic utility item uncommon? When something is common it has less perceived value, whether you want to sell it on the GTN or provide it to friends and family. The only way I could possibly see this added to the game without having a severe impact on crafters is if the item did not work on orange-quality shells at all, and we know that's not the intent.

 

Not necessarily. I didn't say the augment kit had to pay attention to what augment was put into it. The creation of an "Aim or Cunning" augment kit would just restrict that particular augment kit to being used for heavy/medium gear that a trooper/bounty hunter or smugger/agent would wear. This mechanic is already partially in use anyway.

 

Expanding upon orange-quality schematics is the right direction. The production of augmented orange shells provides crafters with a unique yet non-vital function to fulfill in the game. The addition of "Augment Kits" would completely destroy this purpose.

 

The crit-crafting award of the item receiving an augment slot is the worse possible thing to do to crafting period. It renders every piece of armor or weapon created via crafting as sub-par unless it crits. Furthermore, they cannot even be reverse engineered for materials without obtaining a cheap armoring/hilt and putting into them. It's a very alpha system that needs more work.

 

Critting is fine for crafting, but the "crit" reward needs to be something other than making a superior piece of gear because in the long run, all crafting attempts that don't crit are useless until augment kits show up.

 

No one likes to make useless things and I had to make 19 useless things to finally get 5 useful things to fill my last Armormech order. I had to bill the guy 24 things worth of material costs to break even - that only serves to artificially raise the cost of producing gear to outlandish levels.

Edited April 26, 2012 by Raeln

[Raeln]

No, and the devs agree. They've already said they are aware that long failure streaks are likely if not a certainty given the number of players, and that they are looking into ways to avoid the issue of long streaks. Most likely they're debating whether or not keeping count of number of attempts on a per item basis in order to prevent people from exploiting the system by trying to RE an inexpensive item to get the odds up before trying to RE the expensive item you really are interest in is worth the additional size of the character in memory.

 

They shouldn't even have to debate how to track the failure modifier. Track it per item for the last X days, then discard it. Obviously, someone shouldn't be able to try to bake their failure rate by failing on low level cheap items only to unload their buffed RE chance on a high end item.

 

At the same time, RE'ing raid drops should be 100% though.

[HeavensAgent]

Google search FTW

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=3535201#edit3535201

 

(edit: FWIW, that's actually a different quote talking about not able to RE quest schematics than the one I remember talking about not being able to RE orange ones in general)

The quote doesn't mention anything about maintaining the importance of crafters. If anything, it actually demonstrates that crafters are not intended to have such a role, and that the current situation was always intended to be nothing more than temporary. Nor does it indicate, in any way, that crafters will be involved in the process of obtaining the "augmentation kits".

 

In short, that quote fails to address anything I was asking about.

Edited April 26, 2012 by HeavensAgent

[HeavensAgent]

Negative. Such a function already exists to separate heavy/medium armor from armormech and synthweaving. Armormechs create aim/cunning heavy/medium armors. Synthweaving create strength/willpower.

That's not a mechanic, though. There's nothing automated about it; the developers code the list of items created by a crew skill by hand. It could not be adapted to the purpose of identifying an Aim or Cunning Augment. And, once again, how does one determine what constitutes and Aim or Cunning Augment? Or how does this handle the switching of Augments?

 

Not necessarily. I didn't say the augment kit had to pay attention to what augment was put into it. The creation of an "Aim or Cunning" augment kit would just restrict that particular augment kit to being used for heavy/medium gear that a trooper/bounty hunter or smugger/agent would wear. This mechanic is already partially in use anyway.

No such mechanic currently exists in the game, though. Besides, even if such a mechanic could be created, what about the smuggler that wants to wear medium armor designed for a Knight? In fact, there are several examples of medium armor in the game restricted, specifically, to both the Smuggler and Jedi Knight classes. How would such a system function in these situations?

 

The crit-crafting award of the item receiving an augment slot is the worse possible thing to do to crafting period. It renders every piece of armor or weapon created via crafting as sub-par unless it crits.

But Augments are not required to play the game. It doesn't make non-crit items any less valuable or viable then they ever were.

 

Furthermore, they cannot even be reverse engineered for materials without obtaining a cheap armoring/hilt and putting into them. It's a very alpha system that needs more work.

This is an identified bug, and irrelevant to the discussion. You are supposed to be able to reverse engineer crafted orange shells for materials, and this will be corrected in the future.

 

Critting is fine for crafting, but the "crit" reward needs to be something other than making a superior piece of gear because in the long run, all crafting attempts that don't crit are useless until augment kits show up.

 

No one likes to make useless things and I had to make 19 useless things to finally get 5 useful things to fill my last Armormech order. I had to bill the guy 24 things worth of material costs to break even - that only serves to artificially raise the cost of producing gear to outlandish levels.

How do you propose, then, then crafting remains a valued component of the game? Right now Augmented orange shells are the only draw, as they are the only way one can obtain an Augment slot i custom-quality equipment. Once that's gone, so is the value of crafters.

[HeavensAgent]

At the same time, RE'ing raid drops should be 100% though.

To what purpose? There might as well be no schematics for these items once "augment kits" are added to the game. The orange shells will have no purpose, because the raid drop itself will boast the same functionality. Edited April 26, 2012 by HeavensAgent

[GnatB]

The quote doesn't mention anything about maintaining the importance of crafters. If anything, it actually demonstrates that crafters are not intended to have such a role, and that the current situation was always intended to be nothing more than temporary. Nor does it indicate, in any way, that crafters will be involved in the process of obtaining the "augmentation kits".

 

In short, that quote fails to address anything I was asking about.

 

this is a temporary arrangement that will change in the future when we implement means to retrofit existing gear (including social) with augment slots (without devaluing crafters in the process).

 

"Without devaluing crafters in the process" Seems to speak directly towards maintaining the importance of crafters, but I agree, it doesn't actually specify that they will involved in the augmentation process. (which may or may not even be a "kit") That being said, if they aren't devaluing crafters, then they either need to be included in the process, or have some entirely new value that will balance out that loss.

 

And another one

Mid term (currently planned for Game Update 1.3), we are introducing a mechanic that allows anyone to add augment slots to any orange gear (including social), but we are doing it in a way that keeps crafters valuable. We will discuss this in more detail in a while after the 1.2 focus has died down a bit.

Again, *strongly* suggesting that however augment slots are added, crafters will still be valuable. Meaning either still part of the process, or something completely new that means they don't NEED to be part of the process to keep value.

 

What's that saying, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one? Sure. It's possible they are going to add some thing you buy from junk vendors that adds an augment slot. But then to keep crafter value, they'd have to turn around and do something real cool for crafters. Much simpler just to keep crafters involved in the augmentation process.

Edited April 26, 2012 by GnatB

[GnatB]

How do you propose, then, then crafting remains a valued component of the game? Right now Augmented orange shells are the only draw, as they are the only way one can obtain an Augment slot i custom-quality equipment. Once that's gone, so is the value of crafters.

 

Thinking about this some more, that isn't entirely true. Except possibly for Artificers. The only way one can obtain an augment to put IN those augment slots is also crafting. So while it's true that making augmented items more readily available would be a significant detriment to selling augmentable items, it would be a boost to actually selling augments.

 

That being said, the benefit would be NOWHERE near the loss. As-is most people can (and are) paying to get augmented stuff. So it's not like augmented items aren't fairly readily available. Probably just not ones with the looks people would prefer.

[HeavensAgent]

"Without devaluing crafters in the process" Seems to speak directly towards maintaining the importance of crafters, but I agree, it doesn't actually specify that they will involved in the augmentation process. (which may or may not even be a "kit") That being said, if they aren't devaluing crafters, then they either need to be included in the process, or have some entirely new value that will balance out that loss.

I have no clue how I overlooked that. Maybe I mistook it for parenthetical citation; I have been reading a lot of journals lately. Thanks for the other quote as well.

 

Thinking about this some more, that isn't entirely true. Except possibly for Artificers. The only way one can obtain an augment to put IN those augment slots is also crafting. So while it's true that making augmented items more readily available would be a significant detriment to selling augmentable items, it would be a boost to actually selling augments.

 

That being said, the benefit would be NOWHERE near the loss. As-is most people can (and are) paying to get augmented stuff. So it's not like augmented items aren't fairly readily available. Probably just not ones with the looks people would prefer.

You're correct on both points. The market for Augments would increase, especially for use throughout the leveling process. That said as a modification they are simple to produce and can easily flood the market, thereby limiting the potential for them to be seen as a vital and valuable contribution to the game. The crafters' role in the game community is going to take a huge hit once Augmented orange shells can be obtained from other sources, a fact that is only going to be stressed even further by the limited number of item styles crafters can produce.

 

Honestly, I can't see any way for the developers to add some form of augment-adding mechanic without severely devaluing the role crafters play in the game. It doesn't make sense based on what they've added to the game since launch, and I strongly believe it is the wrong direction in which to progress.

[GnatB]

Honestly, I can't see any way for the developers to add some form of augment-adding mechanic without severely devaluing the role crafters play in the game. It doesn't make sense based on what they've added to the game since launch, and I strongly believe it is the wrong direction in which to progress.

 

Agreed. Which is why I feel forced to assume that if said means doesn't somehow devalue crafters, then it must therefor include/require crafters. (thinking about it, I sorta like the idea that the way to obtain an "augment kit" is by reverse engineering an augmented item for the same slot/weapon type. Possibly not even 100% chance. I'm torn though on whether or not you should need any specific crewskill level to perform this particular type of reverse engineering.)

[HeavensAgent]

Agreed. Which is why I feel forced to assume that if said means doesn't somehow devalue crafters, then it must therefor include/require crafters. (thinking about it, I sorta like the idea that the way to obtain an "augment kit" is by reverse engineering an augmented item for the same slot/weapon type. Possibly not even 100% chance. I'm torn though on whether or not you should need any specific crewskill level to perform this particular type of reverse engineering.)

That would preserve the crafter's role in things, but can you imagine the troll tears that would result? The boards would be flooded, and with no swimming in SWTOR we'd all drown. No fishing, either, so those that manage to find high ground before being swept away won't be able to pull the rest of us out.

 

[Cerion]

Actually, with a 20% RE chance, your chance of success in 28 tries is about 99,8%. This means that 0,2% still fail on average or 1 person in 500. With hundreds of thousands of players crafting each day the REAL surprise given those chances would be if no one were this unlucky.

 

This is the other point that is often overlooked regarding RNG on MMOs...there are thousands of people playing. SOMEONE is going to be really unlucky. That is a given. That person will then come to forums to complain that RNG is broken. That also seems to be a given. The OP just happens to be that unlucky player.

[Zican]

This is the other point that is often overlooked regarding RNG on MMOs...there are thousands of people playing. SOMEONE is going to be really unlucky. That is a given. That person will then come to forums to complain that RNG is broken. That also seems to be a given. The OP just happens to be that unlucky player.

 

Or, the more likely case, there's a bug with some items or some sort of unknown event that causes RE to bug out and fail.

 

 

Here's a video of me reverse engineering green "Skill Barrel 10" 16 times without success (after having RE 30 times before this video, which is the reason I decided to capture it on video). 46 attempts with a 20% chance per attempt is not working as intended. Yes, there is a chance, although EXTREMELY poor, that I'm just very very unlucky with this one item (RE working as intended on my other crafted items). But there's a far greater chance that there's something wrong in the system with certain items or that there's something that causes RE to fail (something completely random, like logging in, talking to a vendor twice, then trying to craft).

[PatT]

I'm pretty sure probability of this level is primary school, not higher education.

 

As has been said multiple times. 20% does not mean YOU WILL GET an item within 5 tries (or even 10, 15, 20 etc).

 

Yes if you do more times YOU HAVE MORE OF A CHANCE OF GETTING A PROC OUT OF ALL, but each individual chance is still only 20%.

 

For example if I make 5 attempts.

The chance I get 1 or more procs is:

(Chance of 0) = .8*.8*.8*.8*.8* = 0.327

1- 0.327 = 0.673

 

Or a 67.3% chance of all 5 attempts that I will get 1 or more procs IN THE TOTAL (each individual is still only 20% chance). This is only just over a 1 in 2 chance that you will actually get 1 or more procs in this 5 attempts.

 

Now in 10 attempts:

Chance of 1 or more procs is:

1- (Chance of 0) = 1- (.8)^10 = 1- 0.107 = 0.893

 

So there is actually OVER A 10% CHANCE that in 10 attempts you STILL will not get a single proc (which is actually quite a high chance).

 

As you can see even with 20% chance individually per attempt, there is still a very viable chance even in high numbers of repetitions that you will receive no proc.

 

This. However, I argue some people never see this kind of math, period.

[Fygee]

I'm inclined to believe that there are certain items that are bugged, or something else with the system is bugged.

 

Yesterday and today I RE'd 60+ items (lvl 43 gloves and lvl 41 bracers, medium armor, both green) and gave up after not getting a blue to pop after either of them.

 

I took a break and tried again later. Got a blue on both after RE'ing only a few more times after. Additionally I haven't had too much problems RE'ing anything else outside of the normal failure/success rate (some normal good/bad luck streaks and mostly average success on par with the 10/20% chance it states).

 

There's bad luck, and then there's astronimcally "more likely to be hit by lightning" bad luck. 60+ misses on an item that has a 1 in 5 chance of success per try? There has to be something else going on.

Edited April 27, 2012 by Fygee

[PatT]

I guess I tend to be one of the lucky ones. I usually make only 3. I made 10 of something today and managed to get all 3 purple varieties in that 10. And then made 3 of the purples and got a 2nd level purple. Even more awesomely, once I got the schematic for the purple "Commander/General/whatever" level of the purple...I only made one and Kira critted on it and it had an augment slot! I say awesome.

 

I don't know why, but I routinely do better than the odds on re'ing. Not always. It's like gambling. If you're having an unlucky streak, STOP. Try again later. Know when to hold em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away.... There's the best advice for anything that has "chance" in it. If I don't RE a blue or purple in 5 tries, I go do something else until my luck seems to change.

 

Given that, Kira seems to crit a lot. And for some odd reason, so does Zenith doing artifice (though there's no documented rating for it - he crits about 1 in 5 times). For Artifice, that means 2 for the price of 1.

 

I have not done extensive recordkeeping on this, and I suppose I could... but that's pretty boring. Just know, if you're going past 20, you're on an unlucky streak and it's really time to cut your losses or crafting just gets too expensive. I never try more than 10. Mostly I do 5. Sometimes only 3. Often actually. Today was one of my good days. Some days aren't.

 

There is no such thing as truly random numbers on computers either. Not sure, but maybe not in life either. The occurrence of randomness is a very complicated mathematical discussion by itself.

[fongers]

There's definitely something off if the skill tip says 20% and people are routinely RE'ing more than 10 times for one proc. Sure it's technically possible since as stated earlier each attempt is independently rolled but it should be extremely unlikely. If you rolled a dice twenty times, what are the chances you'll never get a 1?

 

I think what they should do is lower the proc chance to 10% but implement a system where if you RE the same item nine times in a row unsuccessfully you'd be guaranteed to get it on the tenth. That would still create a large market for material and mission skills but would cut down on the frustration of crafters who RE a few dozen times and end up with nothing. I imagine there's at least a few crafters out there who gave up crafting completely after too many failures.

[PatT]

I'm inclined to believe that there are certain items that are bugged, or something else with the system is bugged.

 

Yesterday and today I RE'd 60+ items (lvl 43 gloves and lvl 41 bracers, medium armor, both green) and gave up after not getting a blue to pop after either of them.

 

I took a break and tried again later. Got a blue on both after RE'ing only a few more times after. Additionally I haven't had too much problems RE'ing anything else outside of the normal failure/success rate (some normal good/bad luck streaks and mostly average success on par with the 10/20% chance it states).

 

There's bad luck, and then there's astronimcally "more likely to be hit by lightning" bad luck. 60+ misses on an item that has a 1 in 5 chance of success per try? There has to be something else going on.

 

been hit by lightning. Not recommended.

[Saighead]

been hit by lightning. Not recommended.

 

Yeah. Seems a bunch of us going about with lightning rods in our packs these days. Like three of the four major crafters in my guild.

 

I actively craft artifice, cybertech, biotech, and synthweaving between my 4 characters. I've got to say, Cybertech and Biotech in particular have something... uh... more likely to attract lightning than the other skills, and seemingly more so on non-linear REs.

 

99.9 percentiles are happening too commonly on a repeated basis to the same individuals, to NOT have something strange be occurring within the code.

Edited April 27, 2012 by Saighead

[Mahrdol]

I think there is a Global cool down or something that prevents you from getting too many RE's/crits. I find I have much better odds if I take a few hour break between RE's. I have been crafting WH/BM gear and I think that the WH gear has a much lower crit rate then the BM. Edited April 27, 2012 by Mahrdol

[HeavensAgent]

Here's a video of me reverse engineering green "Skill Barrel 10" 16 times without success (after having RE 30 times before this video, which is the reason I decided to capture it on video). 46 attempts with a 20% chance per attempt is not working as intended. Yes, there is a chance, although EXTREMELY poor, that I'm just very very unlucky with this one item (RE working as intended on my other crafted items). But there's a far greater chance that there's something wrong in the system with certain items or that there's something that causes RE to fail (something completely random, like logging in, talking to a vendor twice, then trying to craft).

No, the odds of this happenings aren't poor at all. As has has been mentioned elsewhere probability dictates that this sort of thing happens among the community with some frequency, given how many people play the game and how often items are reverse engineered. If you want to approach this from a statistical perspective, you'd need to record a lot more than what you demonstrate here. You'd need to make note of a few thousand attempts in order to obtain an appropriate sample size to even begin to illustrate the actual percentage. Once you did, you should start to see the results nearing the defined 20% success rate. Your actual results would vary, but as your sample size continued to grow the average success rate would continue to near that defined percentage.

[HeavensAgent]

This. However, I argue some people never see this kind of math, period.

After spending two years as a college math tutor I guarantee some people never see this kind of math, and would argue that of those who have seen it only a handful can be bothered to understand what it means; of all the topics I worked on with students, probabilities and statistics was overwhelmingly dismissed as unimportant, too confusing, and not worth the students' time.

 

From my perspective it was very frustrating. Some of the posts this thread demonstrate those same attitudes.