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

How does skill effect chance of Amazing rolls?


Arcadi
 Share

Recommended Posts

Blair's streaking article makes clear the die roll both of assembly and experimentation (namely d100 + skill compared to difficulty). This is a little too swingy for my tastes, but at least its easy math.  (Although mat quality now modifies this roll during assembly, but there is feedback in the UI as to how that works.)

However, one piece is still a black box: amazing assembly.  Does an Amazing Assembly always occur on a fixed 96-00 (ie same odds as a 20 on a d20 in AD&D), OR, does it occur when your skill + roll exceed the difficulty by a certain amount?  In the first case an Amazing Assembly is ALWAYS achievable and never more likely no matter how you train your skill; in the second skill training has a direct effect on your odds.  If you are skill 6 against diff 35 (for ease of math say after modification for mat quality) and need 115+ for Amazing, then simply adding 2 points DOUBLES your chances.

A third option is the so-called "open ended" roll.  A 96-100 doesn't ALWAYS Amazing, but it allows you to roll again and add, so skill still has an impact, but it is no longer strictly linear.

The same question applies to Experimentation as well, except instead of just two success categories (like assembly), it has moderate/good/great/amazing.

Have their been any statements on these calculation...or do they just want us to reverse engineer them heuristically?

 

Edited by Arcadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't over think it right now. 

Blair, after watching months and years of feedback is currently writing crafting 1.5, and a bunch of risk related stuff is going to change.  We know he said in a stream something to the effect that you will be able to chose your risk, so.... anything is possible.

 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do understand what you are saying, but with that attitude why even test or give feedback at all?  It's all going to change.  Should we not attempt to understand the game as we play and give feedback on it because it is incomplete?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Arcadi said:

I do understand what you are saying, but with that attitude why even test or give feedback at all?  It's all going to change.  Should we not attempt to understand the game as we play and give feedback on it because it is incomplete?

No, that's not even close to what I was saying. First, I didn't say you shouldn't give feedback because it's incomplete, I was addressing your very specific question.

Quote

However, one piece is still a black box: amazing assembly.  Does an Amazing Assembly always occur on a fixed 96-00 (ie same odds as a 20 on a d20 in AD&D), OR, does it occur when your skill + roll exceed the difficulty by a certain amount?

All I was saying is that it's a waste of time right now to try to figure that formula out, because that math is changing, right now. Blair has a new plan that is half implemented in 5.8, and will probably finish in 5.9, that we will need to see in action before commenting and critiquing will have the maximum value.

ACE has had about 18 months of input on the crafting math, and from what I have seen of how they develop, they now have an adjusted plan that unless something triggers an impossible to ignore Ah-ha moment, they will implement and see how it works before any further changes considered.

It was a heads up, that anything you figure out right now is certain to be wrong.

ACE has never been mathematically transparent about how the "risk" calculation math works.  It's been a mystery since the first time anyone realized that 100% risk did not automatically translate into failure.

But by all means, if you want to try pushing a rope, go ahead.  I never said one word about you not giving feedback. It's just that it looks like most of us that have deeply examined the crafting math are taking a "wait and see" approach at the moment, because we know significant changes are inbound.  

Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

 It's just that it looks like most of us that have deeply examined the crafting math

Right, that's all I was asking about.  But it seems like you haven't actually deeply examined it, or you would know the answer. 

I just wanted to know if either there had been official communication OR if someone had already done the work.  I wasn't expecting *you*, KrakkenSmacken, had done the work (no offense, just judging by how you've responded to my posts in the past), but there are other people who post in the crafting forums that have done heuristic testing before. 

I understand that you don't know the answer.  Thanks for your responses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2018 at 9:52 AM, Arcadi said:

Right, that's all I was asking about.  But it seems like you haven't actually deeply examined it, or you would know the answer. 

I just wanted to know if either there had been official communication OR if someone had already done the work.  I wasn't expecting *you*, KrakkenSmacken, had done the work (no offense, just judging by how you've responded to my posts in the past), but there are other people who post in the crafting forums that have done heuristic testing before. 

I understand that you don't know the answer.  Thanks for your responses.

No official communication, and the best numbers I have seen are estimates off of a few dozen experiments. 

With the old timers on all components of crafting, and the only resource availability taking a long time to gather, especially for the higher end mats, it took literally hours to try to get even a small sample size.  As you can probably tell, if your dealing even with full percentages 40-80 samples just to isn't going to give you any kind of accurate result.

This was about the most thorough sample I've seen, but I think you quoted this thread in another post.

 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, veeshan said:

Ill tell you now if you have 7 skill and recommend skill lvl is 75 u fail every time, did it 10 times and failed every experiment :P

7-35 is/was a 50/50 crap shoot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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