I acknowledge your point Jacenson however at the moment one of the few ways you can reduce the odds of item destruction when enchanting is to use higher quality equipment -excellent- which makes it kind of a requirement if you intend to do any enchanting beyond one enchantment.
If the odds of loosing an item to enchanting destruction were not tied to quality or had some other way to help mitigate then the good quality items would see more value.
I made this post under the impression that the Devs wanted to limit the amount of RNG headaches players would encounter and wanted to pose possible alternatives.
Dismissing the discussion because it is a 'minority opinion' is not helpful and ads nothing to the discussion.
The devs have already made investigations and adjustments to the RNG system in order to alliviate RNG headaches, the biggest point of evidence of this is the melee combat ability that removes RNG from melee damage instead just giving the user max damage on the range.
@GamerSeuss
If you have no constructive feedback then please keep it to your self.
What other options might those who feel this is something worth talking about have?
On a related note certain buildings take up different amounts of space depending on their orientation. and roads cannot be offset which further breaks down the grid into larger blocks. so the 169 x 169 becomes effectively a 30x30 area with large buildings taking up 6x6 blocks, small buildings taking up 3x3, and roads fixed in a grid and taking up 2x2 with little to no option to offset.
@GamerSeuss
You can only learn from failures that could have been successes through some action of your own. like having a higher luck stat or put more points into the crafting skill.
Failure from random RNG produces nothing but frustration because there is nothing you can do about it. Nothing. It is random, arbitrary, chaos.
Earlier I was putting the second enchant on a staff, it said there was 76% chance success, 5% of destroy. The enchant failed three times in a row and then destroyed the staff. What is there to learn from that? 'be luckier?' 'sucks to be you'? Totally useless. There is nothing I could do to affect the result, no skill, equipment, or tech which was available to avoid it. Just random arbitrary RNG saying " today you fail because, fuck you." Meanwhile another person on the server enchants five things in a row at 60%success, 15% destroy with no issues and wonders what the problem is as they dont see it because it does not happen to them, Due to random, arbitrary RNG just saying 'I like this guy today'.
Giving players something they can -do- to get what they -want- and avoid -failure- promotes action, farming, and learning.
The only thing a person learns from having their plate armor disappear from a 5% fail chance is -sucks to be you. Which is not helpful in any way shape or form, If anything they are more likely to just give up in frustration.
Another data point:
54% nutrition, 156% projected yield, 150% fertility, 392 final yield.
very not what it should be...
I believe that the desire to make higher quality equipment rarer and more costly can be done without RGN and with more resource sink and player satisfaction.
The current system has 3 RNG levels for crafting.
Basic is 80fine/20good, and stays there for residents despite tech.
Craftmanship+ specialty shop:
80good/20 exceptional
This roughly means that every third item will be exceptional
Engineering + specialty shop:
40good/60 exceptional
This roughly means that every other item will be exceptional
All these odds are fine and appear fair.
But because of RNG it is entirely possible to have a run of 15 items with none being exceptional.
(I have experience with this from making hundreds of cotton cloth armor)
This is quite frustrating and produces lots of worthless unwanted good equipment which floods the market with little demand when exceptional goods are also available.
My suggestion is to switch from RNG to resource costs.
Instead of one craft button you have two.
One with the base resource costs that produces the lower quality option.
The other with twice (for the 40/60 ratio) or three times (for the 80/20 ratio) base resource cost that produces the higher quality option.
So with Engineering and a tailors shop you would have two buttons-
One that will cost 5 cotton cloth and produce a good quality cloth armor piece.
Another button that will cost 10 cotton cloth and produce a exceptional quality cloth armor piece.
This maintains the over all odds of getting a piece while increasing the resource sink but letting the crafter know what they will get instead of having them roll the dice to see if they are lucky or not.
This reduces the issue of crafting unwanted good items and prevents the market being flooded. In addition with a reliable way to get exceptional items it is more likely to see them for sale in the market instead of hoarded as rare event pieces.
This same base idea can be extended to enchanting.
In the enchanting case the first enchant on an item requires one of each reagent, the second requires two of each reagent, the third requires four of each.
Even if you keep the RNG odds of loosing an item the loss is quantifiable in its cost to replace without having to worry about more cumulative RNG gambling.
only at 100% encumbrance and then again somewhere by 500% up to infinity. I can still walk with 1200%
Currently there is no use for chipped or fine gemstones.
I understand that they will have -some- use in the future with jewelry.
But considering the frustrations with attempts to enchant elemental damage bonuses on to weapons (or arrows in the future) I think that they would be excellent candidates for enchanting materials.
They could give earth, energy and an element (air, fire, water, etc...)
and allow for more control over the enchanted element damage bonus given.
Having all of them be the exact same recipe is quite silly and frustrating.
Giving the chipped or fine gemstones a use while also allowing finer results of elemental damage bonusses would be solving two problems in one action.
it is based on your dex and computer latency.
The higher your dex the faster you move.
The higher your ping or lower your fps, the more 'skippy' your movement is and the slower you move.
same with resident tables
A lot of the power scaling in the game comes from equipment. If a new player (especially melee) is gifted with a set of enchanted armor and weapons they could easily take on the beginning world bosses and in a group could take on a medium.
If all they did was camp those bosses and log out while others gather the summoning materials for them then yes, they could abuse the pvp mechanic to get a slow trickle of pages (and materials eventually) for the whole protection time without possible contest.
I agree that this is an issue but cannot think of a way to make the legendaries combat zone a enforced pvp area where there are no protections at all. (it would also make the battles more tactical in the careful use of AOE abilities so as to not hit allies)
While there is real world damaging effects of artificial chemical fertilizers I do not think that they would be intentionally implemented in this game.
I have been doing a lot of crop testing and discovered an issue.
One fertile land node was drained to 39% cereal nutrition and I expected it to have a low yield in comparison to its neighbor field which was at 120% cereal nutrition. Both had 150% fertility.
This was not the case.
The 39% nutrition field had a projected final yield of 164% and an actual yield of 411 wheat.
The 120% nutrition field had a projected final yield of 142% and an actual yield of 357 wheat.
Whatever is calculating the projected and actual yield of the crop is having some issues as there is no way that a crop with 1/3 of the nutrition level should out produce another.
Both fields had the same irrigation for their entire cycle (both were watered at the same time) and all variables other than nutrition were the same.
Please fix this bug before the next test as currently it means that lower nutrition fields produce more grain than higher ones.
Check out Meridian. We have a number of posts on the forums and are pretty chill.
:https://forum.fracturedmmo.com/topic/9133/meridian-pvx-syndesia-international-diplomacy-politics-trade-warfare/62
Yea, this is a known thing.
It has to do with overlapping zones or spawns.
You can find lots of this near and around the roped off residential plots.
Mostly it is just a minor annoyance and people shrug and move on to another bush.
@LonelyCookie
You know that you can bank money into the house in advance and pay for , like 1 month, ahead so that if you know you will be busy you can plan for it and have it all paid off.
Better to say that 5 hrs of game play pays for 5 weeks of rent.
Oh and something needs to change with chests and crop stacking...
A large chest has 45 slots. Grain/beans/meat stack to 100. So you can put 4500 into one chest. That is 225 bags.
Meanwhile a warehouse holds 192 bags.
So a single large chest can hold more (potential) bags of grain/beans/meat than a warehouse.
wow, this is a huge bug as it makes it easy to do meat hunting for supplying the city with protein bags !
Good catch.
For thorough testing I purposefully drained a field of nutrients by planting wheat repeatedly on it.
At 39% nutrients and 150% fertility it allowed me to plant wheat, ok, cool.
But it harvested 411 grain which is significantly more than it should be. bug?
At the very least it would not let me plant again at 9% nutrients, so that is good.
The AOE damage of frost blast does not occur quite frequently.
In testing against groups of wolves the damage often only affects one wolf and totally ignores all the rest of them despite the fact they are practically sitting on top of each other.