Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Crafting Percentages


gauntix
 Share

Recommended Posts

If I fail at crafting an item that should be 75% success rate, more than I think I should, I can chalk it up to being unlucky. I swear that I fail like 6/10 times for a 95% success rate. I need to know if other people are experiencing this. Just spent like 45min - 1 hour farming for my blacksmithed weapon which after taking a crafting potion brought it up to 98% success. Then I failed at creating it.

 

Is this an issue or am I just really really unlucky? I don't want to spend the time farming for a weapon if the % values are not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Percentages don't mean what we think they should intuitively mean.

 

You can hit an "Amazing Success" with 100% risk, and there are many reports of sequential failures that have outrageous odds of occurrence.

 

Getting 4 fails in a row at 95 %, something I have personally seen two or three times, should have odds of 1/160,000.  The odds are very very long that I would have seen that twice in the short time we have been testing.

 

If I had to guess, the % represents an additional odds over and above some base line failure rate you can't ever go below.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Percentages don't mean what we think they should intuitively mean.

 

You can hit an "Amazing Success" with 100% risk, and there are many reports of sequential failures that have outrageous odds of occurrence.

 

Getting 4 fails in a row at 95 %, something I have personally seen two or three times, should have odds of 1/160,000.  The odds are very very long that I would have seen that twice in the short time we have been testing.

 

If I had to guess, the % represents an additional odds over and above some base line failure rate you can't ever go below.

I see. So you believe that base success could fall on let's say 90%. So all the success rate percentages you see are 75% of 90% or 95% of 90%. That would certainly be misleading. I know all of it can and will change but it really sucks to invest a lot of time into something, while using crafting Potions as intended, only to have it fail.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, percentages displayed should represent whatever percentages the system is using to determine success etc.  There shouldn't be any hidden calculations that a player needs to somehow figure out if they are not shown in game.  That said it is still the testing phase of the game so its possible its just a bug or some internal calculations are not working as intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What many people seem to belive is that if they fail and item with 98% succes changse then the next item with 98% succes changse is a granted succes.

 

the current system is just as it shows. 98% succes means still a 2% changse to fail.

Think of it as a cube with 100 sides. This cube is roles every time you craft something and in theory it can fail 100 times in a row. But thats unlikely.

There is no fail safe so there is allways a risk. That however also means you can succed with low changse.

 

 

In the past i played a game where a monster droped a rare item with 0.01% changse. I killed around 100 of them in 5 min. I farmed 5-6 hours every day for 4 month straight without finding anything.

A friend came and found 2 of these items in 5 Mobs.

Thats just bad luck for me and very good luck for him.

 

 

Critical hits are RNG too. You may loose 6 hours of farming ore just because the enemy got a lucky crit on you.

 

Thats RNG, the dice roles and all you can do is hope it roles in your favor.

 

A game without RNG would be boring however. Think about it if you are the underdog, you are stats wise weaker then the enemy.

Without RNG you have no changse to beat the enemy so you either give up or just run away. You dont take the changse of fighting that enemy because you know that you will lose.

Now comes RNG.

You may still be the underdog stat wise but you still fight because you may land a critical on that enemy while he doesnt, So you win the fight.

Or you run away anyway not taking that risk. But there is an option presented to you. You can choose what to without knowing for shure how it will end up.

The same goes for the other party. They may stat wise win but thanks to RNG they may still loose. So there is allways a risk.

If i know that im going to win then i attack even with ultra rare loot in my inventory, however with RNG i would rather retread to be better safe then loose it.

 

The same principle can be applied to crafting. Your guild may be the underdog but because the enemy crafters fail some hight quallity equipment while yours dont you still win the fight thanks to superior equipment.

 

The changses that this happens may be low but it still exists and this in itself makes the game fun.

 

 

 

For the 100% risk i belive its a multiplier rather then a fixed numbers. So rather then saying the risk of failure is 100% it take the base risk X changse and multiplies it with added risk Y = total risk chanse Z. Z then roles the  dice.

That beeing said it would be nice knowing the base changse and how skills change it. A lot of tooltips are missing but seeing the past patches they are working on it.

o8WHnLc.png

THE most active European guild. Join us now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been running some tests on combines at listed "95%" and out of 100 combines I had an actual 89.47 success rate. So it appears there is something else going on here.

 

I ran the test and tracked the percentages as I went along in a spread sheet. My first fail happened after 5 combines and so the only time I was at or above the 95% mark was in the first 5 combines. Thereafter it never went over 92% and pretty consistently tracked at the 89% range

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with RNG in games is that the game designer shouldn't implement a pure RNG. If a payer get 2 or 3 consecutive failures he will always cry 'foul' or out of 100 events he only get 40 successful outcomes from a theoretical 50% he will cry foul.

 

In a pure RNG system your sample size is always going to be too small to prove the correctness of the RNG. With a six sided dice you throw 3 consecutive 6s you may think your chance of throwing another 6 is very low but because each event is independent your chance of throwing a 6 on your next roll is unchanged, it will always be 1 in 6.

 

Game designers can build in anti-streak mechanics to avoid loosing or winning streaks. There is a lot of debate as to whether these are good or bad, with some people advocating 'anti-streak' mechanics is open to abuse.

 

IMO the problem with the current crafting system is there is too much RNG. Yes you can bias the dice in your favour but the end result is still a dice roll and it doesn't provide any satisfaction when you have assembled all your components and consumed all your resources and the final roll is a failure. That doesn't give me much incentive to try again. Some players may try and try again to get that max stats but I believe they are in the small minority.

Edited by Dirkoff

Looking for a casual guild ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been running some tests on combines at listed "95%" and out of 100 combines I had an actual 89.47 success rate. So it appears there is something else going on here.

 

I ran the test and tracked the percentages as I went along in a spread sheet. My first fail happened after 5 combines and so the only time I was at or above the 95% mark was in the first 5 combines. Thereafter it never went over 92% and pretty consistently tracked at the 89% range

 

The standard deviation of the binomial distribution is (N * P * (1-P)^.5

 

In this example, its (100 * .95 * .05)^.5 = ~ 2.18

 

So, from the sounds of things, you're only about two standard deviations removed from the norm.

 

Please note:  In theory, all your events should be independent of one another, which means if you have a bad run of luck and have a low success rate, you're gonna need a whole bunch of additional trials to get back to .95%

Edited by narsille

WAZ6Fov.png

"The cinnabar is a lie"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...