Square Enix, please think about both Casual AND Hardcore crafters..

[Ryaz]

If anyone is unaware you can instantly stop any macro by running another macro. I keep one with just one line : /echo MACRO STOPPED . Pressing this instantly stops your macro if, for example, you proc a poor on BB.

Yeah, though its not even worth it that much. You only need 35k of the 40k possible for max scrips and I usually still hit above that even with a poor Byregot's. I modified my rotation a bit to add in a couple more prudent touches and I still end up with 100% with normal mats and about 25 cp left of 618. Without specialization, I'd still be good.

[Ksenia]

you people here on thread are such baby...

*cookies breathes*

butt hurt peoples: ohh no cookies is the worst evil elitistt player ever OwO

you people want hurt cookies every chance there is for you to have. stop it. you people need to grow up and stop bully one girl over something that is foolish. i think what problem is is that cookies trigger you all so you all want to witch hunt and be rude to her. hypocrites you all are here.

second. you are clown for telling person to nerf one self. only SQUARE ENIX can do. lol it also make me laugh. cookies was not bragging here. she just make statement that it too easy. you get trigger and say you done. grow up and stop be clown! you english people are most sensitive people on platform here. very weird people you are here

We have been seeing this for 6 MONTHS!!!!
Challenge, they want crafting to give a challenge and they go out of their way to delete all challenge, Assume it's out of the box 'easy' when it isn't


For the record, Learn to read. I NEVER said she should nerf herself. But wave that pity flag. Play the victim. Do whatever it is you need to do to carry the belly ache forward.

[Callinon]

This is the ignorance I was talking about that borders on willfully obtuse. Don't mind disagreement but don't taint good logic with just putting words in someone's mouth. Where in that did I say players choose randomly?

Right here:

The main thing a player adds to a fighting game vs a bot is RNG.

I put no words in your mouth. I quoted you directly. Now I've done it twice.

I guess it's possible you don't know what RNG means so here you go:

Random number generators
RNG.
RNG is a game term that is an acronym for "random number generator". Random number generators (or, more correctly, pseudorandom number generators) are algorithms used in computing when an outcome needs to be as random as possible.

If you used the wrong words here, that's on you. But you quite specifically said that players add a random factor to fighting games. And no.. player actions in fighting games are entirely deliberate.

Fighting games are actually just a horrible analogy here too. Crafting is a puzzle, not a battle. You can either solve the puzzle or you can't. In this game we also add stats to your character that define your capabilities as far as solving particular levels of this puzzle goes. But it's still just a puzzle.

[Ryaz]

We have been seeing this for 6 MONTHS!!!!
Challenge, they want crafting to give a challenge and they go out of their way to delete all challenge, Assume it's out of the box 'easy' when it isn't


For the record, Learn to read. I NEVER said she should nerf herself. But wave that pity flag. Play the victim. Do whatever it is you need to do to carry the belly ache forward.

Hi, Ksenia! How's the new server?

[Aelin_Ashryver]

RNG does not equal difficulty. It's just a way to gate progress and give an illusion of difficulty. But gathering stuff and doing the same rotation praying it pops is not hard it's just annoying imo. Making crafting be more thoughtful and less easily macro'd and forgotten about I would be for though.

[Maeka]

IMO, what they could do/could have done, is play with the Conditions a bit more. Instead of just Normal/Good/Excellent/Poor, they could instead make it, I don't know... make it condition of your mind while you craft...

Balanced: All actions are equal.
Perfectionist: +50% Quality, -50% Progress
Impatience: +50% Progress, -50% Quality
Shaking Hands: -30% success chance, +30% efficiency
Steady Hands: +30% success chance (finally a way to use Hasty Touch!)
Attentiveness: Action taken during this round does not cost durability.
Recklessness: Action taken during this round uses double durability but gives double the result.

And every round, the game picks these from random (you could put stat weights and other conditionals on some of them to prevent severe cheapness from happening). This would force you to choose your actions based on what state of mind your character is in. A macro would utterly fail with this sort of system unless the stars aligned just right, and each craft would be different and there would be no set rotation because you would have to react to what is going on, and plan for different possible scenarios.

[Callinon]

IMO, what they could do/could have done, is play with the Conditions a bit more. Instead of just Normal/Good/Excellent/Poor, they could instead make it, I don't know... make it condition of your mind while you craft...

Balanced: All actions are equal.
Perfectionist: +50% Quality, -50% Progress
Impatience: +50% Progress, -50% Quality
Shaking Hands: -30% success chance
Steady Hands: +30% success chance (finally a way to use Hasty Touch!)
Attentiveness: -50% durability loss (does not stack with Waste Not)
Recklessness: +50% durability loss

And every round, the game picks these from random (you could put stat weights and other conditionals on some of them to prevent severe cheapness from happening). This would force you to choose your actions based on what state of mind your character is in.

Sort of.. but it's really just adding more random factors.

I'm convinced that if the goal is to add difficulty to crafting, then some kind of wholesale redesign of the system is necessary. There just isn't any room for actual difficulty in the current system.

Now, that being said, I'm NOT convinced SE's goal is to add difficulty to crafting. I know there are people here who (vocally!) want it, but I'm not super sold on the idea that it's actually what SE wants to do.

About the only thing SE could do right now to at least discourage macro use is to have quality thresholds so unbelievably high that it'd just be actually impossible to reach it without fishing for condition procs. And I mean... I guess... but that'd make crafting gear upgrades feel pretty awful. I don't think there's a good solution to this.. certainly not a simple one.

[Maeka]

Sort of.. but it's really just adding more random factors.

I'm convinced that if the goal is to add difficulty to crafting, then some kind of wholesale redesign of the system is necessary. There just isn't any room for actual difficulty in the current system.

Now, that being said, I'm NOT convinced SE's goal is to add difficulty to crafting. I know there are people here who (vocally!) want it, but I'm not super sold on the idea that it's actually what SE wants to do.

About the only thing SE could do right now to at least discourage macro use is to have quality thresholds so unbelievably high that it'd just be actually impossible to reach it without fishing for condition procs. And I mean... I guess... but that'd make crafting gear upgrades feel pretty awful. I don't think there's a good solution to this.. certainly not a simple one.

Not all RNG is bad.

Some RNG is good.

RNG is bad when the RNG dictates whether or not you win or lose (regardless of your inputs). But if you took the idea I presented and tailored it enough that with the right decision-making (along with some margin of error being allowed, less margin for endgame crafting), you should be able to succeed 90% of the time, then you'd end up with the good sort of RNG that does not dictate win/loss unless you get extremely unlucky.

The idea is to make it all based on decision-making based upon the current condition, with some planning, forethought, and contingencies if things go wrong. The skilled player will look ahead and know when it is safe to take a gamble, or when he should play it safe and not do so. The skilled player will know what actions to use under what conditions.

The unskilled player will make lots of mistakes, and end up with NQs and failed synths, which is how it should be.

[JowyAtreides]

They should simply allocate a different skill being unusable for each masterbook recipe. (leave 1-79 stuff as easy recipes with zero restrictions)

Not only will this remove globally usable macro's but it ensures a higher level of intimacy and knowledge of your skills (or just a macro for each and every situation).

"So you want to craft a shirt, well you have to go about it differently to the pants you just crafted, have fun"

It's literally the only challenging concept I can think of that they can add to the current state.

[Ryoutoshi]

fluff

You're just doing what you keep doing. Nitpicking wording to avoid the actual point being made.

I'm bored at work so let's see how specific someone has to be to prevent that.

It's good that you know what in-game RNG is. I had removed that part from my post where I explained how the fighting game analogy works with that because I figured this part was obvious. You see what happens when I give you the benefit of the doubt?

RNG is being used in the same loose way we all do when talking about it in games. In terms of fighting games, we are more talking about a literal "psuedo rng". Using the definition of psuedo: "not genuine; spurious or sham."

You are against someone. They have say 8 ways they can approach. You do not know what they will do. You, with whatever skill you may possess and understanding of their options, can perform actions that may cause the other player to perform an action for which you have a ready counter to reduce the options that can occur. Regardless, what they do is as far as you are concerned, is random.

You can nitpick that the mind itself is not random. But the definition of psuedorandom number generators you so helpfully placed here for all to see, says that it is an algorithm (a set of rules for solving a problem in a finite number of steps, as for finding the greatest common divisor.) Not random, but a reason based solution to simulate random. Similar to how a skilled player takes the mechanics and tools in a fighting game, and determines there actions to simulate a varied and, while not entirely unpredictable, unexpected but sequence of attacks and approaches to win.

Translate this to proc dancing in crafting. You've got enough cp for your finisher plus a little extra. A skilled crafter knows how to navigate their toolset to try and tease out extra chances for RNG to swing in their favor i.e, observe.

In regards to the overall mindset of tackling the issue: The 'psuedorandom number generator' in computing and the 'psuedo random nature of two opponents dealing with the numerous outcomes that can come from the player are a solid argument for the existence of skill in relation to crafting.

And when you examine the way both players reason through each situation, "Crafting is not a battle" as if resolving a player isn't just as much a puzzle as a battle is simply ignorance. Not stupidity. But ignorance: lack of knowledge or information.