Minimum chance to fail a combine is dumb.

[Phantron]

Because min fail rate exists, it actually makes it okay that not everyone skills up the same because with a believed 40% fail rate on the highest end stuff, this means you don't actually need 300 skill to make these as well as anyone else in terms of economic efficiency.

[Bumkus]

Because min fail rate exists, it actually makes it okay that not everyone skills up the same because with a believed 40% fail rate on the highest end stuff, this means you don't actually need 300 skill to make these as well as anyone else in terms of economic efficiency.

agree completely. a cruddy (not the word I was gonna use, but this is a family site ) form of game balance, but game balance all the same.

[Mannwin Woobie]

You are mixing apples and oranges. Do you honestly believe that they put in a minimum fail rate to balance the skillup paths? I doubt that very much.

Addressing the mimimum fail rate question which affects everyone, not just ogres, and not just tailors or fletchers, is a totally different thing. They introduced something which totally changes the idea of a tradeskill "skill" level. Someone with 300 skill and AA masteries SHOULD have more success than someone with 260 skill and no Masteries, etc. Introducing a factor that gives them both the same chance of success is rubbish. And I think that the Master tradeskillers out there (myself included) have a right to be angry that all the work they did to get those extra 40 skill points and those AA's was WASTED, pure and simple.

[Bumkus]

You are mixing apples and oranges. Do you honestly believe that they put in a minimum fail rate to balance the skillup paths? I doubt that very much.

Addressing the mimimum fail rate question which affects everyone, not just ogres, and not just tailors or fletchers, is a totally different thing. They introduced something which totally changes the idea of a tradeskill "skill" level. Someone with 300 skill and AA masteries SHOULD have more success than someone with 260 skill and no Masteries, etc. Introducing a factor that gives them both the same chance of success is rubbish. And I think that the Master tradeskillers out there (myself included) have a right to be angry that all the work they did to get those extra 40 skill points and those AA's was WASTED, pure and simple.

This is why I would suggest different stats for different items, with skillup path factored in. Kinda like how races with xp penelty's having offsetting innate regen.

There was a post a ways back, suggesting that DoN armor was supossed to be much more involved, encompassing numerous tradeskill items across multiple zones, but time constraints seem to have forced a much trimmed down model. I don't think SoE ever intended to have every race and class combo competing over the same raw ingredients. Different ingrediants would have allowed the markets to set the balance on the required components. (Only one frog doing tailoring? Prices drop. 30 elves doing tailoring? Prices rise.)

And second, exidence would suggest that the increased minimum fail is only on DoN armors. (Any evidence to the contrary?)

Clearly the current implementation has lead to frustration. For me, as a non raider, I viewed DoN armors as a legitimate, hard earned upgrade path from bazaar gear. I got a few items, but not quite as far along as I would like.

My main frustration though, is the reduction in combine components, even more than the increased fail of the components. Cant click the button if I dont have the ingrediants. I view tradeskills as a goal, independent of the marketability of the skill. (Am I alone in this?) It is part of progressing the character. Kinda like backflagging for a zone that you've outgrown, just to say you did it.

[Bumkus]

I might be focusing a bit much on an Ogre's perspective. Gonna open up a collection thread to see how many people have hit 300 since the Velious tailoring nerf. Maybe I am the only one feeling the pain on Tailoring skill ups.

[Twistagain]

I might be focusing a bit much on an Ogre's perspective. Gonna open up a collection thread to see how many people have hit 300 since the Velious tailoring nerf. Maybe I am the only one feeling the pain on Tailoring skill ups.

Vah Shir here....you are not.

[Sylphan]

Over-250 tailoring is mostly a matter of Othmir Fur these days. Those who are willing to take the othmir faction hit have managed to maintain slow progress toward 300, and some have made it.

For the faction-conscious, everything else is quite rare, for either farming or buying from xp groups. There's zillions of folks still at 252 or thereabouts, you're far from the only one.

[Phantron]

Yes I do believe the minimum fail chance exists to balance skillup paths because there is absolutely nothing stopping SoE from putting GM BP/Legs as trivial 450ish to achieve the currently believed min fail rate on them (around 40%). However doing so would put GM BP/Legs out of reach for any tailors that can't use skillup on Shissar Scales, and pretty much put smithing out of reach for anyone that didn't do Sickles.

Without the min fail rate the situation will be much worse. You'll segregate people into those who have Mastery 3 and those who do not (if 60% fail rate is maintained for people with mastery 3, it means with the same skill but no mastery 3 you can only succeed 20% of the time!). You'll segregate people with relatively easy skill up path (anyone who can use Shissar Scales) to those who do not. We sort of have this already, but currently the only real difference is what your skill level says. My tailoring might say 293 with way less effort than the effort a non-Shissar Scale usable race put in to get to even 252 but at least someone at 252 + 5% + mastery 3 pretty much has the same chance at making a GM BP/leg as I do.

It might not be fair to people who skilled up assuming it provides a benefit and found out it does not, but I think it's better that way then limiting GM items to only those who happen to be a race with a good skillup path.

[Reorx]

Without the min fail rate the situation will be much worse. You'll segregate people into those who have Mastery 3 and those who do not (if 60% fail rate is maintained for people with mastery 3, it means with the same skill but no mastery 3 you can only succeed 20% of the time!). You'll segregate people with relatively easy skill up path (anyone who can use Shissar Scales) to those who do not. We sort of have this already, but currently the only real difference is what your skill level says. My tailoring might say 293 with way less effort than the effort a non-Shissar Scale usable race put in to get to even 252 but at least someone at 252 + 5% + mastery 3 pretty much has the same chance at making a GM BP/leg as I do.

That is a good point, although there is a range of trivials from 386 to 450 that one could use to balance the success rate of those with and without the Mastery AAs. Perhaps instead of modifying the fail chance before the recipe min/max limits are applied, the Mastery AAs should add a smaller chance to succeed after the cap. i.e., An 80% success rate would go to 90%, a 60% success rate would go to 70%, etc... That way someone with the mastery AAs would always be better than someone without regardless of the recipes minimum fail rate.

Perhaps that's a crazy suggestion, but I'd definitely be more interested in purchasing the mastery AAs if they worked like that rather than the current system.

[Mannwin Woobie]

It might not be fair to people who skilled up assuming it provides a benefit and found out it does not, but I think it's better that way then limiting GM items to only those who happen to be a race with a good skillup path.

You are right, it isn't fair to those that have skilled up and/or spent the AA points.

Why do some insist on dredging the race-vs-race, or deity-vs-deity skillup path arguments into everything? I understand you frustrations, but that doesn't justify your position here. The GM items (or any high-trivial item) should be limited to those who have the SKILL, just like it has always been. HOW you got your skillups is meaningless.

[Mannwin Woobie]

I view tradeskills as a goal, independent of the marketability of the skill. (Am I alone in this?) It is part of progressing the character. Kinda like backflagging for a zone that you've outgrown, just to say you did it.

You are not alone

[Bumkus]

You are right, it isn't fair to those that have skilled up and/or spent the AA points.

Why do some insist on dredging the race-vs-race, or deity-vs-deity skillup path arguments into everything? I understand you frustrations, but that doesn't justify your position here. The GM items (or any high-trivial item) should be limited to those who have the SKILL, just like it has always been. HOW you got your skillups is meaningless.

1. Because in-game diversity is an intended aspect of game design. Tradeskills are intended to be open to all races. There already seems to be some "clumping" by race. The question is, at what point does the clumping introduce negative consequences. (Like, hmmm. I wanna make a new char. I can twink a Woodelf Ranger right up to EP grade gear straight out of the bazaar. Or I can be a Vah Shir Beastlord, and "Raid and roll" for the same grade of stuff.) Truth is, I dont know the answer to this question.
2. Because tradeskillers suck a whole lot out of the economy, which is essential in a world where stuff doesnt wear out. In this respect, the tradeskiller still clicking for skillups is actually more important to game mechanics than the one sitting at 300. Guess what? this tradeskiller doesnt suck much out of the economy these days. Dunno if SoE can track this, but I s'pect there was a large upswing in tradeskilling activity a couple months after DoN, and I further s'pect that it has fallen off sharply as of late. You are gonna get a lot more suck if tradeskillers are represented by all races of the community.
3. Because this is not just race and deity dependent, it is also timeframe dependent. Those who skilled up to 300 on Velious armors prior to the reduction in Velious Trivials had a path open to them that does not exist today. (And I say this not to diminish the accomplishments of any 300 tailor. It is a mother of a tradeskill under the best of circumstances.) But trust me. You dont wanna tell a newbie tradeskiller, "oh by the way, you'll probably never hit 300 tailoring, because it is really freakin' hard now." Especially when WoW tradeskilling looks pretty attractive the the casual player.

The one thing that I think we an all agree on, however, is that the system is, ummm, probably not running as smoothly as intended.

[Merlaina]

Two cp

Not even talking about the GM DoN fail rate for a second...

I think even the 5% fail rate on anything is pretty annoying. Just today I answered an ooc for a smith with 212+ skill (mine is 247). All he wanted was for me to do TWO combines, one trivial at 212 and one at 206. I managed to FAIL the simple 212 skill combine.

Now I'm a decent chunk over the trivial for this item. Granted, I'm not at 300 skill with 15% mod and all AAs. I just did this with a plain hammer (my gearlok was on another character and I didn't want to make him wait for me to switch and get it, thinking "it won't matter anyway, I'm way past that stuff." DOH!)

I think that once you get over a certain point past the trivial the 5% chance of failure should go away. Maybe it should be a bunch, like 80 points, but I still think that eventually items that are very trivial to you should not be failable... unless your character is really really drunk. That I can see.

As far as the DoN minimum failure rate thing goes, I think there should be benefits for people who have gone the extra mile, raised their skill to 300, gotten all the AAs, and worked for a high % mod item. I don't think it's fair that people who have done this have the same success rate as, say, me (or close to it). I think it would be more fair to give these items an even greater trivial than to give them a minimum success rate. If the purpose is to control the flow of items into the game, make the drops rarer (I can't believe I just suggested that, but there it is), or if the trivial is increased so that a max smith/tailor/whatever has the same success rate as they do now, that would still control item flow exactly as effectively as it is now controlled. To just give something a guarenteed failure rate is a cop-out, and also makes no sense in any role-playing context (Yes, I've seen the GU comic... MMO and RPG parted ways long ago, but I still thought I'd throw it out there).

[Twistagain]

I think that once you get over a certain point past the trivial the 5% chance of failure should go away. Maybe it should be a bunch, like 80 points, but I still think that eventually items that are very trivial to you should not be failable.

That's the way it is. For every 40 points beyond the trivial your unmodified skill is, 1% is taken off of the failure rate. So at 200 points ABOVE trivial, it is nofail. In your situation, at 252, you have a 4% fail rate. At 292+, it is 3%. That's the best you can get on a 212.

[Melinia]

Not sure if this comment would de-rail this or not...
My 2cp
I look at the fail rate = real life oopsies..
Regardless how good you are at something you are bound to mess up.
aka.. Did you ever make a cake and forget to add the eggs? (my mom did that one)
Did you ever put something in the oven, step away only to have your son remind you after it caught fire? ( mom again... famous flaming garlic bread)
Did you ever spend days working on a quilt, finish it only to have your cousin point out you missed 10 spots in the sewing (cousin/mom instance).
Or maybe spending hours cutting out pieces to a sewing project only to realize after you start sewing you missed measured half the pieces (I claim the fifth)
This can be applied to doing anything. Even the most skilled craftsman in real life mess up. You just dont see it cause they wont admit it. This is reflected in the game with the fail rate.