Topic: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Tharrn wrote:

of 'everyone can craft everything and everything is the same

a Trail member wrote that about what he doesnt like about other games.

In Perpetuum you got Items in 4 tiers, and some divided into small and medium, and weapons in short and longrange.

A T4 HCL laser that I can craft is exactly the same as a T4 HCL laser that someone else can craft. The only difference is, how much materials each one has used to build it. (some can already create them with 30% Air)

Do you like that?
Lets discuss it!

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

some form of player intention would be cool.

But i do think the kernal research system needs some love to be more corp friendly.

Maybe tier 5 items could be this... player invented.

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

There needs to be a corporation research database and a role that can be granted that gives people the ability to access that corporation research database.

One of the biggest failings of the crafting system is tying it in to one character.  Every person in the corp should be able to share their research knowledge with the corp database

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

well if you want to have customization then you will need a totaly diffrent and way bigger database. atm you only have a specific item. what that item does and what stats it has is that DB.

if you want custom items then every item has to be stored seprately not only the item ID. this will make things way bigger and maybe way slower.

on the other hand this is a nice idea.
i could think of a crafting system where you build sub components and you can manifacture these together to a end product.
so if you build a autocannon(just for example) then you will need a few components, barrel, engine, targeting system, ammuniton container ... ...
so if you have diffrent kinds of sub component and every component gives you some stats, then you can build the gun together and you will get diffrent stats dependent on what component you use.
so as additional idea, every item has a limited number of "slots" for these sub components. and you can place your sub components in them. maybe the slots will be categorised by type as well. and your base item determins how much slots of what kind you have avalible. so you have to choose what you want to have in that item. more range, more damage, better hit dispersion, less accu usage, fitting requirements... ...
so if you want bigger ammo box you have to cut on something else. aso...
this would be way more complex then what we have atm. it also would mean that a produser has way more to do to get to his end product. but it will give him more freedom of the items you can create.
that could work with everything. items bots, structures... ...

on the other had something like that will be more hard to ballance. if you have fixed items it is more easy to ballance it. if you give ppl the freedom you will always have to look for the max etreme way a player can use the system.

another option is to bind the quality of the item to the crafting skills of the agent. but i have to advise against this, because new players will be fustrated over months and will not be able to build anything usefull at all.
on the other hand you could ballance that with the item cost. better items with better stats would require better skills but also more resources. while items with lower stats will require less skills and will also require less resources.

general from my perspective: complex is always good. too complex may scare ppl of, or bring probems with it.

so back to question.
the current system is not bad. more complexity is good but dont over do it...

just some random thoughts on that topic...

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Kernel research/prototype subsystem is awful, the rest is fine as is.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Mark Zima wrote:

Kernel research/prototype subsystem is awful, the rest is fine as is.

I totally agree with that. The research system is bad as it is and bound to single characters. It has been said a few times already, the system makes you feed a single person with all the kernels and you can gain much and thrive a lot. Once that guy goes AWOL or has RL issues or whatever, you are doomed and have to start from scratch again.

I like how "Blueprints" (CT´s) degrade with their use, I really do.

There should be some sort of "horadric cube" however, where you put in 3x level 1 decoder to get 1x level 2 decoder, like the rune system in diablo 2. That way the thousands of level 1-4 decoders rotting around in hangars would get a use again. Same thing would be great for 25% mk2 CT´s.

The ones saying "impossible" shall not disturb the ones already doing it

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Thanks for making me buy game time to reply here, Annihilator tongue In fact I would have subscribed anyways, and after learning that I still get my full 14 days there was no reason not to.

In my very noobish opinion manufacturing should be a viable profession, meaning someone dedicating to the task of building stuff to be blown up should be rewarded somehow. If my very noobish view is correct that's done in the form of mineral and time efficiency so far. That's good for a start.

Is there any limit to who can reverse engineer/prototype/manufacture what currently? I mean certain skill levels could be used to 'gate' the high end stuff, meaning hobby producers making ammo in their garage couldn't produce the most sophisticated tech, which would then be limited to those who spent EP on industry... or is that in place already? I am still trying to figure a lot of things out tongue

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

You can currently only reverse engineer tech 1 and prototype modules in higher tech.
The higher tech prototypes can only be built by someone who has "researched" enough robot kernels to have that item unlocked in his research database.

High EP investment into production pays off as you can make things faster (reducing the nic-cost of the factory) and more efficient (less materials to use).

The ones saying "impossible" shall not disturb the ones already doing it

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

I didnt know that, less factory time reduces the cost of production??? what a noob lol

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

With the advent of PBS's, i am sure that there is room to moan and whine a crafting system from the devs.

Would give yet another reason to build them.

I call first dibs on 1%+ to speed strings panties to my robot.

11 (edited by Celebro 2012-02-14 16:00:55)

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

The manufacturing side of the game needs to be more specialized, meaning more EP extensions in order to build certain items, right now any one can build anything with just a CT at different efficiency only. This change will enable to grab a niche on the market.

The research system will have its own problems when market grows and more players join, it would be far easier to buy your way into a t4 prototype producer in a very short time with just NIC.

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

When researching kernals I'd like a choice as to what modules I put the research towards. This would almost certainly require a large reduction in the amount of research progress for each kernal for balancing.

Combine this with a research "pool" within corporations (as suggested by previous posters) and corporations can plan which members should research which modules to end up with a useful portfolio of manufacturable higher-tech. This would make newbie smaller corporations more viable and fun whether PvP or Indy.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

good point siddy:
PBS will have an intresting impact on crafting -since it would be very unlogical if i would need standing in my own station to get best efficiency, and even less logical if i would need to pay NIC for any station service.

back to main topic:
In my view, the Item database and crafting mechanics are kinda contradicting

  1. The number of base items you got (eg. robots - 1 per class and faction) would be logical for a game where you can have random stats on those items - with name of the crafter imbued to the item.
    Even the Prototyping and Reverese-engineering process is pointing into that direction

  2. The Tiered system, item naming, robot bonus system, on the other hand, is more logical where you got a ton of alternatives offered by the DEVs in their database PER itemtype.
    I havent checked yet, but this is probably ripped off from EvE... where you got several choices

I would have liked if the DEVs had put their proirity on one of those two ways. Personally, i would like point A to be integrated into equip crafting, and point B into Robots (which would need to triple the the choices of robot parts in a short time)

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

In perpetuum, ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) better describes the crafting system. Vetern producers, which would typically be found in beta corps, are capable of fueling a large PVP corp locked in mortal combat.

The downside, is that there are no large PVP corps, so much of that industrial gathering and manufactoring is going to the open market, where new players can't compete.

Its not possible to create a system within the open sandbox of Perpetuum that allows new indy players to compete against vetern producers (and the same is true for PVP). Bascially, the industrial might of vetern players needs to be focused elsewhere, so there can be gaps to be filled.

If custom equipment requires EP, the vetern players have some saved, or not have to spent it elsewhere, which will allow them to get that EP quicker.

If custom equipment requires special mats, vetern players, with access to beta and multiple PVE bots, will farm it up faster and cheaper.

If custom equipment is random, vetern players will be able to afford the time/nic/mats required to press the button more often, with a better chance.

The obvious issue though, is custom equipment (non-vanity) causing large balance issues.

Of all the above, the only thing that can even the playing field is a random drawing type of thing like that other mmo, but research is also random, and is the number 1 complaint about kernels.

tl;dr - As the game adds more players there will be more opportunity for sales, as it adds space, remote markets can open up, and as it adds modules, single producers will tend toward specializations.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

I have to say I think the current system is fine. Yes, I do think more variety would be cool, but completely revamping the module system? To me that seems like a lot of wasted development time. If you want more variety in the modules offered this could easily be done through tweaking T5 in this way (when it is released).

To also follow the off-topic discussion. I do think corp-research would be good, but it has to be done in a good way (e.g. it should take longer to attain full research for a corp than for an individual as it is shared, only X prototypes can me made concurrently from the corp research base). If this is done badly, everyone will bathe in t4 prototypes overnight. It's certainly the time of change I hope the DEVs will ask for feedback on proposed changes before it's done.

TL;DR Current system is fine, creating alternative takes a lot of development time for small gains.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Personally I have always wanted corporation research and branding of weapons.
When a researcher leave a corporation they leave all their branded producible items but take with them the knowledge of how to make them again.

This would make researching not about randomly getting items but getting research points and having to direct them them to items you want with stats you'd like.

I'd like to see T1 and T2 kept but T3 and T4 be changed to this system.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

I see the issue only in research system what is a goal, not a process.
Else is fine.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Alexadar wrote:

I see the issue only in research system what is a goal, not a process.

I fully agree with a process based system. It would also be nice with a system where you specialize in different modules and/or bots effectively spreading the research/manufacturing over the server:

Player A researches/manufactures ammo in a day or two
Player B researches/manufactures ERPs in a week
Player C researches/manufactures grophos mk2 in two weeks

But what do I know about industry? tongue

Arga?? Where are you?

EHm..this topic was about something else though right..?

well

Player A could make "Annihilators supercompositecore slugs" (+2 damage)
Player B could make "Alexadars notnerfedERPs"
Player C could make "Villes pink grophos"

wink

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Egil wrote:

Player A could make "Annihilators supercompositecore slugs" (+2 damage)
Player B could make "Alexadars notnerfedERPs"
Player C could make "Villes pink grophos"

Please, no.

f.e.

If new system will lock research behind guy who invented it: f.e. "Alexadars ERP"...what if Alexadar will quit a game?  noone will get this content anymore.

If new system will allow to make different modifications of item? We have it already (t1-t4) and can combine them into one robot.

If new system will randomize stats on production: it will make a wastage of items, because corporations will launch x10 lines to get those 10% with maxed stats. All other items will be sold (for what? its silly) or refined (silly)

Leave system as it is, except revamping research-n-prototyping.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Off topic again with research...

Researching needs to stay with individual accounts, its a profession and it makes that account valuable and useful, but it has a lot of disadvantages too for corps.

What I would purpose, is a system where research characters can produce virtual prototypes, that use no material but cost NIC. This capability is only available for corporations and is an either/or with actual production.

Meaning, a prototype character uses one of their PT lines and designates it as a VPT (Virtual PT) and pays the production cost, but no materials are required. When the VPT finishes, it is 'stored' in the Corp VPT list. Access to Corp VPT can be set like any other corp function. The 'cap' on the number of duplicate VPT's is by CEO extension up to 20; so you can have (20) T4PV Miner modules for instance.

If the actual PT player leaves the corp, the corp can still produce PT's using the PTV's until they are exhausted. Any player with access can run a PTV on a PT line, but it will now require materials and NIC, but the output will be an actual TxP.

In this way, PT'ers will have a bigger role in the game, and it will give pt'ers with lower research something to do to fill the t2.3 slots. But more importantly, corps will have time to farm kernels, and still produce T4 for awhile, but not indefinitely (which is the reason why corps can't have research).

Tl-DR; Create a way for corps to temporarily continue tiered production even if they lose 1 or more prototyping players.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Arga wrote:

Off topic again with research...

Researching needs to stay with individual accounts, its a profession and it makes that account valuable and useful, but it has a lot of disadvantages too for corps.

What I would purpose, is a system where research characters can produce virtual prototypes, that use no material but cost NIC. This capability is only available for corporations and is an either/or with actual production.

Meaning, a prototype character uses one of their PT lines and designates it as a VPT (Virtual PT) and pays the production cost, but no materials are required. When the VPT finishes, it is 'stored' in the Corp VPT list. Access to Corp VPT can be set like any other corp function. The 'cap' on the number of duplicate VPT's is by CEO extension up to 20; so you can have (20) T4PV Miner modules for instance.

If the actual PT player leaves the corp, the corp can still produce PT's using the PTV's until they are exhausted. Any player with access can run a PTV on a PT line, but it will now require materials and NIC, but the output will be an actual TxP.

In this way, PT'ers will have a bigger role in the game, and it will give pt'ers with lower research something to do to fill the t2.3 slots. But more importantly, corps will have time to farm kernels, and still produce T4 for awhile, but not indefinitely (which is the reason why corps can't have research).

Tl-DR; Create a way for corps to temporarily continue tiered production even if they lose 1 or more prototyping players.

Or corps can just stock pile prototypes as now.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

The corporation research issue is not a problem with the system, is the problem with the communistic play style and its own downfalls. I am not saying its the wrong way, if the prototyper stays then all is good, but if you are going to invest on an other player better make sure what you are getting into.

Ultimately with a more vibrant market (needs loads of players), the only limitation to get t4 is just NIC. If I want a state of the art TV I don't start to research, I just buy it and get my money doing what I know best.

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

elric wrote:

Or corps can just stock pile prototypes as now.

Top end corps actually use prototypes for farming and fittings, and they are expensive to have just sitting around, but that is always a solution.

Small corps or newer corps, simply can't afford to stockpile acutal prototypes.

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

While many of the suggestions are interesting, too many run the risk of throwing the whole manufacturing system into chaos, penalizing people who have done it the old (hard) way, and so on.  What it gets down to is that messing with a complex system is a very tricky business and best approached with extreme caution.

On the other hand, there are things that could be done to spice up manufacturing that don't bloat the DB or screw some people over (while benefiting others).

For example, prototyping bots has always been a waste of resources. So, once the first bot is manufactured or seeded, the only logical thing is to buy one to RE. But what if prototyping bots was made useful.  Say there are rare npc drops that we'll call cortexes (rare as in the frequency of beacon drops). The come in various flavors, such as speed cortexes, armor, accu, cpu, etc.  Some number of only 1 type would be required to make a prototype bot and that bot would have that specific bonus characteristic (e.g., speed cortex = 10% increased speed over standard version). These would be one shot and incapable of being turned into a CT.

This would add variety without bloating the game DB, make the added cost of prototyping a bot worthwhile, add variety to bots, and add pve content. All at the same time and without requiring the devs to spend 6 months of their limited time doing so.

I'm sure there are also other things that could be done along these lines that wouldn't do as much harm as good.

just my $.02

25 (edited by Lucius Marcellus 2012-02-15 22:28:17)

Re: Crafting in Perpetuum - Discussion

Calio, great post!

Just to build on your idea:

All prototypes can be made with any type of enhancer (small bonus only), adding flavour, and the prototype then created becomes locked, such that in cannot be reverse engineered.

Why is this good?

  • It builds on current system rather than revamping everything

  • It adds more flavour to modules

  • It makes prototypes more useful than for pure RE

  • Prototypes are inherently quite expensive, so allows people to 'pimp' their bots

In general, I think 'locking' a prototype from being reverse engineered would be great. For example, I would often love to sell prototypes to combat players, but the risk of RE makes it a hard decision.