Change several resource cap/gates back to Live, SOE, rates at the time of the NGE

savacc · Jul 26, 2024

Resto has been doing resource caps differently than we remember from the Live game. This proposal is to go back to what used to be.
Gethub links: https://github.com/SWG-Source/dsrc/commit/d03881e02da78dcf3a6001219bacc4cb13369e98
https://github.com/SWG-Source/dsrc/commit/29a4a609bf5f237ffedb2cf32bc4d822d4db650d

Zoso · Jul 27, 2024

jt26077 said:
I'm not sure I see the point in this statement. Being dismissive doesn't make the facts less true.
Generally speaking, droids aren't more powerful than pets, but not everyone is a Master CH. Anyone can field a droid though.
Just about everything in the game can be capped with the right resources, even the shipwright schematics. That's not the point I'm making here. What I'm saying is that the proposed change would have wide-sweeping implications across the entire game, and the devs need to take all that into consideration before committing to a decision.

Please show me a capped ship chassis that was made on resto. I was showing how even the stuff you listed really isn't an issue it's just people not wanting to change the status quo

elchapodan · Jul 27, 2024

jt26077 said:
This is false, I'm sorry to say, but that's a very narrow view of the thousands of schematics out there. I gave an example of the bioengineering consumbles, but the all the BE hardware is also subject to this.
A quick scan of a handful of schematics that are also affected are, but not limited to:

Battle armor segment (not advanced) - uses aluminum with a focus on SR. Phrik had the best SR at 900 until Perovskitic alum came along

Recon armor segment (not advanced) - uses copper with a focus on SR. Polysteel was best at 800, but CB copper came along

Micro sensor suite - uses steel with a focus on CD. Duralloy steel was best with 650, but now impossible to cap without JTL steel

Advanced micro sensor suite - same as above

Disruptor rifle (plus many other weaponsmith final combines) - uses copper with focus on SR

Droid armor module 3 - uses steel with focus on CD

Droid item storage 6 - same as above

This list goes on, but hopefully you get the point. It's not just shipwrights and a few 1-off schematics. The impact is far larger than you think

Segment quality is perfectly fine without JTL resources in its current state, so luckily it's a nonissue for that arena. Cores only need to be 93% to have capped Kinetic/Energy/Element as the final appearance craft adds 250-300 to the resists. The cap issues we actually have are with named JTL resources, which is a completely separate issue now.

Zoso said:
it's been shown other than ship parts this would only affect PSGs and bio engineer consumables. well I think PSGs don't count because you don't have enough points to cap energy and recharge anyway

For those commenting about PSGs without knowing anything: Recharge Rate is the entire selling point. Any experienced Armorsmith knows that the quality difference lies solely with Recharge Rate as Protection should always be capped first. The entire valuation of PSGs is the difference between 40k for 66.x (factory-made MK.IIIs) and 250-400k for 72.x (droidekas), that is a substantial difference per PSG. The proposed change would effectively wipe up to 90% current valuation for good PSGs (we're talking over 100million credits for a fulltime AS per year).

If we're going to make arguments about Armorsmith stuff, please keep the facts straight or I am just going to vote no based on lack of trust of understanding from the community.

jt26077 said:
There are more crafting classes than armorsmith and weaponsmith impacted by the current state of the JTL resources. Almost the entire line of hardware and consumables for bioengineers/pet crafting is impacted by this. From enzyme extractors, centrifuges, incubator units, processors, and re-processors. That doesn't include the 9+ components and final crafts for the consumables that do into making a 20 pt hydro. I would have to take a more comprehensive dive into the schematics to see how many are impacted by the current JTL resource caps, but I believe it's far more than people realize.

Thanks for the insight, as someone who doesn't touch BE it sheds light into the broader impact. I think when assessing it's important to answer the question: "Is this a schematic that gets used frequently where a competitive JTL resource would only spawn once every 3 years?" I can personally answer that with Gravitonic Fiberplast (corka) and Perovskitic Aluminum (hivotoumsis) for AS, but would be an interesting question to answer for BE, as well. If the system currently enables resource "droughts" where the reliance is on vets to be storing tens of millions of a resource in order to keep the market alive for 3-4 years then that definitely needs to be addressed, whether it be via this PV or another potential one addressing frequency of competitive JTL resources.

Tyr · Jul 27, 2024

Just tossing this out there but in reality how much different are talking on some of this stuff. Item x is maxed at 100 but best most can do because of resource drops is 99. Does that 1 point make a difference other than in someones head? Of course it would be different for a ton of things but I was wondering just how much is really about wanting something "maxed" compared to 99% maxed.

I could see them putting what they did in place to create both rare and ultra rare "things" that would be crafted with the resources. The flip side is increasing the drops but when everything is rare/maxed nothing is really. Just babbling here ignore it.

Zoso · Jul 27, 2024

Tyr said:
Just tossing this out there but in reality how much different are talking on some of this stuff. Item x is maxed at 100 but best most can do because of resource drops is 99. Does that 1 point make a difference other than in someones head? Of course it would be different for a ton of things but I was wondering just how much is really about wanting something "maxed" compared to 99% maxed.

I could see them putting what they did in place to create both rare and ultra rare "things" that would be crafted with the resources. The flip side is increasing the drops but when everything is rare/maxed nothing is really. Just babbling here ignore it.

The Tie defender should be a clone of the Advance X. The adv X is a quest reward so it comes with 180k mass. The Tie defender has to be crafted and can't be capped. I can't fit my Adv X loadout into my Tie defender. That's like imp BHs having 4 less skill points than rebels. It's even worse for rebels though because the Twing an RGI clone is should be 80k mass so mass is even tighter.

Tyr · Jul 27, 2024

Zoso said:
Please show me a capped ship chassis that was made on resto. I was showing how even the stuff you listed really isn't an issue it's just people not wanting to change the status quo

So let us see....change the resource system impacting multiple things or.....make a pv to change the requirements on the ship chasis......has nothing to do with status quo and everything to do with being cautious, doing research, being patient and trying to find the best result.

jt26077 · Jul 27, 2024

elchapodan said:
Segment quality is perfectly fine without JTL resources in its current state, so luckily it's a nonissue for that arena. Cores only need to be 93% to have capped Kinetic/Energy/Element as the final appearance craft adds 250-300 to the resists. The cap issues we actually have are with named JTL resources, which is a completely separate issue now.

For those commenting about PSGs without knowing anything: Recharge Rate is the entire selling point. Any experienced Armorsmith knows that the quality difference lies solely with Recharge Rate as Protection should always be capped first. The entire valuation of PSGs is the difference between 40k for 66.x (factory-made MK.IIIs) and 250-400k for 72.x (droidekas), that is a substantial difference per PSG. The proposed change would effectively wipe up to 90% current valuation for good PSGs (we're talking over 100million credits for a fulltime AS per year).

If we're going to make arguments about Armorsmith stuff, please keep the facts straight or I am just going to vote no based on lack of trust of understanding from the community.

Thanks for the insight, as someone who doesn't touch BE it sheds light into the broader impact. I think when assessing it's important to answer the question: "Is this a schematic that gets used frequently where a competitive JTL resource would only spawn once every 3 years?" I can personally answer that with Gravitonic Fiberplast (corka) and Perovskitic Aluminum (hivotoumsis) for AS, but would be an interesting question to answer for BE, as well. If the system currently enables resource "droughts" where the reliance is on vets to be storing tens of millions of a resource in order to keep the market alive for 3-4 years then that definitely needs to be addressed, whether it be via this PV or another potential one addressing frequency of competitive JTL resources.

Thank you, @elchapodan, for your thoughtful write-up. I can't speak for all BEs, but I know it was particularly challenging getting a high-quality lab up and running. Capping out an Element Processor without Uvak (perovskitic alum) was basically impossible until Iafa spawned (another perv. alum). With that said, the hardware only makes up roughly 1/3 of the end result. The bulk of the bonuses come from the consumables (centrifuge separation tray, element processing canister, and enzyme re-processing capsule). Each of which has HQ components that are required for the final combine, many of which are subject to the JTL resource being discussed. I'll admit though, you don't need capped hardware and consumables to make a 20 pt hydro, but every little decimal point helps prevent waste when making that final hydro.

Enzyme extractors are in a slightly different grouping, IMO. It's a master artisan schematic, and if you play your cards right, you can get 25 exp points to cap both exp lines. There are 2 gating factors to capping out extractors, one of the subcomponents requires copper with a high SR/UT, and the final combine needs an alum with a high CD. Without JTL copper or alum, there's no way to max them out.

Having said all that, we're fortunate enough to have had some resources spawn that will allow crafters to cap out various aspects of the schematics mentioned, but they're pretty few and far between.

I'm sure Nexus would have good insight to add.

Zoso · Jul 27, 2024

Tyr said:
So let us see....change the resource system impacting multiple things or.....make a pv to change the requirements on the ship chasis......has nothing to do with status quo and everything to do with being cautious, doing research, being patient and trying to find the best result.

When I made a suggestion to change the schematics to make it easier to cap in the past the response I got from phil was to just wait for a spawn. Pretty sure he didn't grasp how impossible that is though

jt26077 · Jul 27, 2024

Tyr said:
So let us see....change the resource system impacting multiple things or.....make a pv to change the requirements on the ship chasis......has nothing to do with status quo and everything to do with being cautious, doing research, being patient and trying to find the best result.

Well, I think Zoso does have a bit of a point with regard to ship chassis. They require alot of high-quality resources with 4 to 5 different attributes being over 950-960 (depending on whether you have the resource bracelet or not). That's just hard. Peroid.
Copper and alum are the big standouts here. To cap out mass you need MA/OQ/SR/UT for both, and you're never going to do that without JTL resources in the game's current state. I think there's a bit of a double whammy here. You're combining alot of required attributes with the JTL resource problem.
Even with SB resources over the past 3 years of spawns, you're still going to fall short with multiple resources:

Schematics - TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints - SWGTracker

TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints - TIE Defender Chassis

swgtracker.com

If you look at the same schematic on SWGAide (which uses the "old way" of resources), you still can't cap chassis mass:

Schematic: TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints

TIE Defender Chassis

swgaide.com

So rolling the resource table back to 2015 would help, but not outright fix the problem Zoso, and other shipwrights, are facing. This doesn't seem like a new problem for ship chassis, pre or post 2015.

Tyr · Jul 27, 2024

jt26077 said:
Well, I think Zoso does have a bit of a point with regard to ship chassis. They require alot of high-quality resources with 4 to 5 different attributes being over 950-960 (depending on whether you have the resource bracelet or not). That's just hard. Peroid.
Copper and alum are the big standouts here. To cap out mass you need MA/OQ/SR/UT for both, and you're never going to do that without JTL resources in the game's current state. I think there's a bit of a double whammy here. You're combining alot of required attributes with the JTL resource problem.
Even with SB resources over the past 3 years of spawns, you're still going to fall short with multiple resources:

Schematics - TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints - SWGTracker

TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints - TIE Defender Chassis

swgtracker.com

If you look at the same schematic on SWGAide (which uses the "old way" of resources), you still can't cap chassis mass:

Schematic: TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints

TIE Defender Chassis

swgaide.com

So rolling the resource table back to 2015 would help, but not outright fix the problem Zoso, and other shipwrights, are facing. This doesn't seem like a new problem for ship chassis, pre or post 2015.

Right. The point is this one point is a ship chasis issue. Changing that has much less potential for negative impacts on all the other things already mentioned. Making small tweaks is much easier and much safer overall. Maybe that PV needs to be redone/reworded and submitted again with all the SW being told to come and help upvote it. Tweak the chasis to fit what is rather than rework and impact all these other things.

Zoso · Jul 27, 2024

jt26077 said:
Well, I think Zoso does have a bit of a point with regard to ship chassis. They require alot of high-quality resources with 4 to 5 different attributes being over 950-960 (depending on whether you have the resource bracelet or not). That's just hard. Peroid.
Copper and alum are the big standouts here. To cap out mass you need MA/OQ/SR/UT for both, and you're never going to do that without JTL resources in the game's current state. I think there's a bit of a double whammy here. You're combining alot of required attributes with the JTL resource problem.
Even with SB resources over the past 3 years of spawns, you're still going to fall short with multiple resources:

Schematics - TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints - SWGTracker

TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints - TIE Defender Chassis

swgtracker.com

If you look at the same schematic on SWGAide (which uses the "old way" of resources), you still can't cap chassis mass:

Schematic: TIE Defender Chassis Blueprints

TIE Defender Chassis

swgaide.com

So rolling the resource table back to 2015 would help, but not outright fix the problem Zoso, and other shipwrights, are facing. This doesn't seem like a new problem for ship chassis, pre or post 2015.

I know I paid like 10 mil for a capped mass Tie Advanced chassis on Starsider during live and you could cap the GCW ship chassis on live too. The GCW crafted ones had higher hitpoints rather than the capped chassis you could buy off the vendor so the very serious spacer went that route. Here though they nerfed the chassis you can buy off the GCW vendor by 5k

Zoso · Jul 27, 2024

Tyr said:
Right. The point is this one point is a ship chasis issue. Changing that has much less potential for negative impacts on all the other things already mentioned. Making small tweaks is much easier and much safer overall. Maybe that PV needs to be redone/reworded and submitted again with all the SW being told to come and help upvote it. Tweak the chasis to fit what is rather than rework and impact all these other things.

I would diffidently support that but would like to include changes for some other ship part sub components that can't be capped because of the swg-source changes like boosters.

elchapodan · Jul 27, 2024

This conversation is only reinforcing my opinion of updating competitive spawn frequency. Even 1 spawn per resource per year would be sufficient to keep the market relatively stable, but the current rate of 1 every 3 years is not.

Tyr · Jul 27, 2024

Zoso said:
I would diffidently support that but would like to include changes for some other ship part sub components that can't be capped because of the swg-source changes like boost

I would suggest the community attempt to agree on the best path forward

As the Dev said above...if I might maybe the SW's could get together and hash out what schems need changing for this cap issue and what in the schems exacty need changing. Make a list and have it ready and make a PV for it.

jt26077 · Jul 27, 2024

Zoso said:
I know I paid like 10 mil for a capped mass Tie Advanced chassis on Starsider during live and you could cap the GCW ship chassis on live too. The GCW crafted ones had higher hitpoints rather than the capped chassis you could buy off the vendor so the very serious spacer went that route. Here though they nerfed the chassis you can buy off the GCW vendor by 5k

I hear you, but I'm not sure comparing what was possible on live to what's possible on Resto would be fruitful. It's not going to be apples to apples. With the live servers, you're working with 8+ years worth of spawns across many, many servers. Here, it's just Resto and 3 years worth of spawns. It's a numbers game of statistics and probability. If Resto is still alive and kicking 5 more years from now, I bet there will have been some spawns that would get people closer to capping those ship chassis

Tyr · Jul 27, 2024

elchapodan said:
This conversation is only reinforcing my opinion of updating competitive spawn frequency. Even 1 spawn per resource per year would be sufficient to keep the market relatively stable, but the current rate of 1 every 3 years is not.

I am one of those that like the rare and ultra rare spawns here because it makes them just that, which in turn fuels the whole ultra rare/rare items that are not just drops. But hey that is just me.

Tyr · Jul 27, 2024

I really do think that a new PV for the ship chasis (SW) should be done.

savacc · Jul 27, 2024

There is not a chance I am revising this PV to only affect chassis. The issue is not about chassis, it's about overall crafting theory, how are we going to treat resources caps and adjust for them?

Maxal · Jul 27, 2024

I vote yes.

jt26077 · Jul 27, 2024

IMHO, this is how the crafting mechanics worked back on live since JTL was introduced in 2004 and worked for ~8 years. Rolling back the 2015 change will mean that higher-end products will appear more frequently on the bazaar, but given the fact that most things can already be capped shouldn't ruin the economy. The thing I have to keep telling myself is that this is a game. Games are meant to be fun, and while there is a certain competitive component to the crafting in this game, I don't believe that reverting the caps back takes too much away from that. The decision seems to lie in how much enjoyment the crafters in the game will benefit from this change balanced with how that impacts the players that purchase their products.

The devs may not agree, but I vote yes.

elvismonkey · Jul 27, 2024

Fuego said:
changing resources in specific schematics is not difficult with a list. changing caps is not difficult. spawn durations i would need to look into more.

not looking to change anything immediately. in order to implement a change, I would suggest the community attempt to agree on the best path forward understanding ultimately nobody will be happy

Adding new resources difficult?

Spit balling here, what if you added another new named resource of each with the same jtl caps. This wouldn't effect anything old and would be just be additional resources going forward added into the pool of rng ?