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

CRITICAL FAILURES SHOULD GO!


Brightdance
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’m not sure if this has been brought up but I wanted to voice my opinion on critical failures.

 

Let me preference by saying so far I have fallen in love with this crafting system. Everything about it is exciting to me. So much so I spend many many hours in a shack doing nothing but crafting for my guildies… it’s a sickness honestly.

 

At this point, I’d say I have crafted close to 100 weapons of all types. I have my Blacksmithing pretty close to maxed out, I just don’t see the point in continuing to level it with potions pushing me to 21 experimentation pips ( a bug that I will be reporting if it hasn’t been already) and crafting skill of over 140.

 

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/214306235351040013/283252766531649536/unknown.png

 

In all this crafting I have found one undeniable truth. CRITICAL FAILURES are cancer to the entire crafting system. This is why:

 

Imagine carefully crafting every piece of a purple book. Praying for no failures of any kind and getting to final assembly with a true masterpiece you are so proud of. You combine and successfully assemble your book, now it’s time for experimentation. You get some good successes on max damage and even an amazing success but on the final pip, you get a critical failure… now what? Still a purple right? It still awesome, yes? NOPE! You look at your green and realize that the damage is actually better on your green then on this dam purple you just worked so hard on. This weapon is now garbage, aside from it being purple it really is just a waste of mats.

 

Critical failures are a double negative. Not getting any % from a failure is bad enough. It immediately lowers the quality of that weapon right there. A purple with a single failure will always be worse than one without one. A critical failure not just makes the weapon bad, it lowers the grade entirely. I’ve made white weapons that came out better than a purple – I could see this being the case if two different crafters with different skill levels were making the weapons but not from the same crafter.

 

I get the point of diversity and failures during crafting, I enjoy that aspect but having a critical failure that not just lowers the quality of the weapon by granting no % increase but actually ruins it all together but giving a negative %, is too much IMO.

 

That’s about it for my rant, I’d love to hear people's thoughts.

 

 

 

Thanks,

BD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me preference by saying so far I have fallen in love with this crafting system. 

 

 

The entire system is a slot machine lever. You claim to love it and then say the only thing you dislike is the chance to 'lose'?

 

The whole point is RNG, you can't claim to love RNG then complain about the negatives results. Well i guess you could, since you did.

 

I am sure alot of gamblers down in vegas would agree, if they could never lose their bank account they would be much happier.

Edited by Vectious

CfWBSig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The crafting system is one big gamble, and in the end it all boils down to praying to the RNGEEZUS that we so often do in other MMO's.  I am not a huge crafter myself, as I tend to like the pvp aspects of games more, but I have done my fair share of failures in Crowfall.

 

But yes, the experimentation part of crafting is the most important one, as a Green weapon can indeed be better than a purple weapon purely based on Amazing success vs Critical fail.

 

I think they should stay, only for the sole reason as to make it more exciting to craft.. If you have every node in the skill tree, crafting just becomes a tedious task of "collect x amount and press craft", having some rng and risk involved makes the system much more dynamic.

Edited by zinnie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love RNG, see I said it again J

 

My argument isn’t against failures or the RNG risk, just that critical failures are too much, having a negative numerical effect is doubling down on the negative effect of not getting any % increase already.

 

A green weapon can still be better than a purple purely based on Amazing success vs Failure, no need for Critical Failures.

 

Thanks for the comments!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love RNG, see I said it again J

 

My argument isn’t against failures or the RNG risk, just that critical failures are too much, having a negative numerical effect is doubling down on the negative effect of not getting any % increase already.

 

A green weapon can still be better than a purple purely based on Amazing success vs Failure, no need for Critical Failures.

 

Thanks for the comments!

Amazing success is basicly a critical success. Cant have the best results with out the worst results.

 

Its a way for the system to balance out the 'one at a time' method vs the 'all in' method. 

 

Statistically you should have a better result with the one at a time method but the risk of it back firing to get a critical failure goes up.

 

Its all about choices, you accept the risk regardless of the method.

CfWBSig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing success is basicly a critical success. Cant have the best results with out the worst results.

 

I get what your saying and I can live with that, it just feels that a Failure should be the worse result. To use your slot machine analogy, it's like putting 25 cents in and instead of losing that 25 cents it takes another 25 from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more of the risk reward philosophy that has been behind almost all of their design decisions so far. If experimenting can't possibly hurt then there is no reason to not experiment as much as possible. With the chance of your try not just failing, but lowering stats, then there is a case to be made for not experimenting if you want something consistent but less impressive. You go from just deciding where to put the points into deciding how many points you really want to risk using.

Edited by Vonpenguin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole critical failure, critical success, RNG bs brings back nightmares of Archeage.

 

 

Oh yes it does.

 

This weekend I have already managed to fail one Green Book and one Blue Book with full crafting pots.

 

I have such fond memories of AA's crafting /s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what your saying and I can live with that, it just feels that a Failure should be the worse result. To use your slot machine analogy, it's like putting 25 cents in and instead of losing that 25 cents it takes another 25 from you.

Could be worse, could have a chance to lose the entire item.

 

Oh wait...

CfWBSig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gona quote my piece from another thread, on why the psychological impact of these two results (Critical Failure, and Combine Failure) are literally psychologically damaging to players.

 

Link to point in the video where they describe it as a slot game "but deeper".

 
https://youtu.be/og_DJoG08T4?t=149
 
Since I used to build slot games for a living, I think I know a few things about how they work.  (Whats your game building experience?)
 
Anyway, Slots are built primarily on the premise of Operant conditioning. Basically a Skinner box. Here is an overview of the concepts from a paper published Saul McLeod published 2007, updated 2015
 
 

Punishment is defined as the opposite of reinforcement since it is designed to weaken or eliminate a response rather than increase it. It is an aversive event that decreases the behavior that it follows.

Like reinforcement, punishment can work either by directly applying an unpleasant stimulus like a shock after a response or by removing a potentially rewarding stimulus, for instance, deducting someone’s pocket money to punish undesirable behavior.

Note: It is not always easy to distinguish between punishment and negative reinforcement.
There are many problems with using punishment, such as:

  • Punished behavior is not forgotten, it's suppressed - behavior returns when punishment is no longer present.
  • Causes increased aggression - shows that aggression is a way to cope with problems.
  • Creates fear that can generalize to undesirable behaviors, e.g., fear of school.
  • Does not necessarily guide toward desired behavior - reinforcement tells you what to do, punishment only tells you what not to do.

Of note is the effect of punishment described on page 3.
 

 
Losing items for using the create button is direct punishment for behavior, the behavior you are supposed to find pleasure in, and has the exact opposite effect a game should have. Punishment weakens the positive response, so if there are more failures than successes, you will eliminate any positive reinforcement or pleasure responses you were trying to develop.  Crafting will create fear, even before the success happens.  It creates fear, aggression, and avoidance. The experience will be more negative than positive, and the net effect will make it not fun. 

 

Just listen to the 5 minutes of the conversation from where I linked, with Blair grinning like a Cheshire cat and almost completely oblivious or even reveling in the obvious discomfort that Markee dragon has to the idea. "You may have made a substandard item". No, your RNG made the substandard item, even though I did everything I was supposed to.  That is text book punishment, taking my stuff and making me feel like I did something wrong for even playing the game.

 

The psychological impact is obvious, with just demonstration resources, Markee twingding and squirming and calling the abort/loss button "Pixel scream" (5:55)  from this model.  The exact guy this is supposed to appeal to, has to fight through discomfort to look for what he hopes to find.
 

If I ever saw this reaction in a blind user group study for a game I was in charge of giving approval on, I would send it back for such a heavy review that the wallets of the investors would be gasping in pain.

 

quick google will show you to hundreds of studies on the effect as it relates to gambling. (I didn't make the gambling reference, TBlair has been peppering his videos with gambling examples for both harvesting and crafting practically every time he gets in front of the camera and talks about them.)
 
You might like to read "Organizational Behavior and Human Performance" Volume 4, Issue 4, November 1969, Pages 375–401 the article "Beyond the teaching machine: The neglected area of operant conditioning in the theory and practice of management", where the topics of "The power of positive reinforcement, the unanticipated consequences of punishment, and the value of partial reinforcement are stressed."
 
That article, and a plethora of articles like it, fully validate the opinions I have expressed in this and other threads.
 
I've shown you mine, now you show me yours.

 

Afterthought.

 

Really the majority of the crafting game is pretty solid.  With the experimentation points (free spins), and the way that math works, all they need to really do is change the odds tables to give a real choice given the influence BP's are going to have on the system.  Also making substandard is not terrible, any more than little wins in slot games are terrible.  Those little wins reinforce that a big win could be coming right around the corner.

 

There are two really terrible things in the model. The total, abrupt, and punishing loss of final combine failure, that players who did everything right up to that point, and did nothing wrong by pushing the button, will definitely feel, and the incentive to trigger the 50%+  "risk" bonus that makes all other options substandard.  

 

Dark souls was harsh as hell, but you almost always felt like if you had done something differently you would have had a chance.  This crafting model does not feel that way.  

 

Without a mini game you can influence with "skill", there is nothing you could have done better, and yet you are punished just the same.

 

It would actually be more interesting if they based the game more on a fruit machine (UK style bar game) models.  Nudge/Hold and Hi/low games really make you feel like you can use skill to influence the outcome.

 
Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what your saying and I can live with that, it just feels that a Failure should be the worse result. To use your slot machine analogy, it's like putting 25 cents in and instead of losing that 25 cents it takes another 25 from you.

Actually its even a worse.  It's like putting in 25 cents, and then the game taking 2 hours pay from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The system would function perfectly fine without failures of any kind. People aren't excited because they didn't get a failure, they are excited because they got a good roll. It's not a binary system like Archeage where your only option is to succeed or fail. Crowfall is different because success is not the primary goal. It is already more than enough of a penalty when everything that is not good or higher will be salvaged for materials to continue the quest for a better roll. The problem with this system is that it is unnecessarily harsh that even after you have salvaged all of your "bad" rolls, you still have a chance to lose your "good" item to a loss or critical failure. This is sadistic and beyond overkill.

Edited by Mytherceria
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be worse, could have a chance to lose the entire item.

 

Oh wait...

I actually hadn't given the failed assembly much thought since it hasn't happened to me much. I guess I feel that your skill should at some point guarantee a success.

 

Krakken - that's exactly what I'm getting at. Thanks for posting and adding all this info. I personally don't care about it right now or even at launch since my guildies will be feeding me mats for whatever is needed. Some will fail most will be good but I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the failures as it stands right now. Like you said, why punish someone for doing everything right except maybe pressing that last button. It's a like a sick version of the TAKE bug. Creates the same fear and feeling of being wronged.

 

This is sadistic and beyond overkill.

Agreed.

 

I'm worried that people won't enjoy themselves as much and actually just quit altogether when we go live due to the unnecessary failures. We probably all know someone who already quit because of the TAKE BUG. This is essentially a lesser version of the bug that shows up less frequent. 

 

BD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe this is overly brutal because the salvage mechanic isn't in yet. 

 

Yes, a critical failure is a lost item, but chances are so is just a failure item.  I think the crit fail is an unnecessary double-tax.

 

Let's be honest, anything under Great success is usually disappointing, especially if you look at how the percentages scale.   And I notice on many/most final products you are relegated to a lot of Good successes or lower.

 

I realize part of this is the limited amount of community and not all mechanics being in, but when you are hand-crafting an item that takes you hours if not days to collect everything for, pushing the experiment button with full pips (per line, so 6 or 8) is more 'scary' than 'exciting', because you are likely not getting that 'amazing' success.  And whilst you are unlikely to get a critical failure, regular failure and 'lesser' successes are very real, and in the back of my (our?) mind, I weigh all those hours of gathering and crafting that will be wasted if RNG decides it doesn't like me today (oh, wait it never likes me if my experiment rolls are any indication).

 

I lost one blue chapter yesterday (kicked to lobby while hitting 'take', no server did not go down, just lost the chapter), and while I already had more blue stone & leather, it took me more than an hour to go collect enough blue ore to make another.  While losing a chapter isn't exactly equivalent, it illustrates that losing even one sub-component can be a painful event, and a very real penalty, just as a failure or other bad roll is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe this is overly brutal because the salvage mechanic isn't in yet. 

 

I think salvage will help a bit but even that mechanic is brutal. Yes, we will get some materials back but the amount that will be lost in the salvaging process will be pretty penalizing. My main concern is that after the painful process of making and salvaging all of the lower rolls, you finally get some great or higher success rolls, but then you get a critical failure or item loss failure. A regular failure or even a moderate success might be tolerated but to lose the entire item even after you've already lost potentially hundreds of other items to mediocre or bad rolls is pretty much just game over for a lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think salvage will help a bit but even that mechanic is brutal. Yes, we will get some materials back but the amount that will be lost in the salvaging process will be pretty penalizing. My main concern is that after the painful process of making and salvaging all of the lower rolls, you finally get some great or higher success rolls, but then you get a critical failure or item loss failure. A regular failure or even a moderate success might be tolerated but to lose the entire item even after you've already lost potentially hundreds of other items to mediocre or bad rolls is pretty much just game over for a lot of people.

 

 

Well, another part of a conversation last night also touches on the advantageous position blueprint will help put people in.  If you have a guild of harvesters feeding your crafters, and blueprints are a 'thing', then those crafters are going to be able to take 'bigger chances'...for example I go to make a metal bar, I play the numbers game and percentage odds, I use 3 purple ore and then 6 green, or 6 white, or whatever (I'd go with green for a number of reasons, but you get the idea here), and go until I get that purple bar, then I blueprint the one i get that 'amazing' on.  While it may not be the most efficient with upfront costs on materials, the sheer volume of things like the purple ore you will save overall will be huge, which will lead to either the opportunity for more/better hand-crafted products, or further refined experimentation for factory production based on min/max values/properties/etc. 

 

Right now we can't afford to take those risks, at least not as flippantly.

 

I think at that point some of the brutality is mitigated, but right now we've got a rough-shod kind of system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Archeage had the added idiocy of having only 1 in 10 be the correct type to advance and 9 in 10 chance to be end of line...   the pyramid of production, needing to make 150-250 lower low level weapons to have one shot at a good one was much worse than CF crafting RNG.  Factories and blueprints will allow us to make dozens of excellent weapons upon a single quality success and AA had nothing like this AND the weapons never decayed.  The RNG was not as much about a single roll but the overall grind of making so much T1 to get enough T2 etc...  and then don't even get me started on the RNG of moving up quality beyond Divine... 

 

tl/dr   AA was much much worse

Edited by Frykka

6FUI4Mk.jpg

                                                        Sugoi - Senpai

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is an interesting discussion. It does seem initially as a bit of semantics - say removing failures and instead creating one or two more layers of success quality - might just shift what "failures" are to basic success. But, it's a fairly important change, since it removes a small drain from the economy. But, I think clogging that drain would be totally worth it in terms of the psychology. If people choose to discard or extract from a basic success, it's self-imposed. A big difference from a small change worth making, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, another part of a conversation last night also touches on the advantageous position blueprint will help put people in.  If you have a guild of harvesters feeding your crafters, and blueprints are a 'thing', then those crafters are going to be able to take 'bigger chances'...for example I go to make a metal bar, I play the numbers game and percentage odds, I use 3 purple ore and then 6 green, or 6 white, or whatever (I'd go with green for a number of reasons, but you get the idea here), and go until I get that purple bar, then I blueprint the one i get that 'amazing' on.  While it may not be the most efficient with upfront costs on materials, the sheer volume of things like the purple ore you will save overall will be huge, which will lead to either the opportunity for more/better hand-crafted products, or further refined experimentation for factory production based on min/max values/properties/etc. 

 

Right now we can't afford to take those risks, at least not as flippantly.

 

I think at that point some of the brutality is mitigated, but right now we've got a rough-shod kind of system.

 

 

Materialistically that works very well, physiologically not so much.

 

See your going to see that BP get made, after many many failure test runs.  Then your going to plow 100X the resources into the blueprint making process.  So emotionally you will have had one win, and many losses, even though you may have acquired hundreds of times the finished materials that one win represented.

 

It's going to take a while for you mind to adapt to the idea that your BP is 100X more valuable than the item, meanwhile your experiencing far more loss events than wins, which reduces the net pleasure aspect of the game.

 

There is a reason the penny slots are the most popular game in Vegas. It's because you need piles of positive reinforcements (small wins) to overcome the sense of loss, and the sense of loss is less the smaller the perceived "bet".

 

I do guarantee you that once you have that amazing success BP, and come back after your thrall has ground out 100 perfect purple bars, your going to fee sooooo happy, but that will not be associated with the crafting part of the game, it will be more associated with the manufacturing process itself.  Doing crafting will be even more fear inducing because after that 100 your going to need to make as good as or better of the same one you just had 100 of.

 

The real thing is that any substandard results will have almost the same economic impact as total loss in a BP environment.

 

You won't BP a substandard item with a couple of failures in it, so the reality is that economically the impact of failure is almost identical in the long term to critical failure, while the psychological impact is 100's of times greater and worse.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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