Sequential Weapon Crafting

[Taijan]

Good day, players of Armageddon. Some of you may recall that when Arm Reborn was being worked on, there were talks of allowing greater customization during weapons crafting. What I remember of the plan there, while possible, isn't very practical for the existing game. However, there are ways I can see to bring forth a similar idea - if you never read about Arm Reborn, don't worry about it, as I'll be outlining it below.

My concern is that the following idea would be seen by you, the players, as more of a hassle than a benefit.  So without further ado, I present:

Sequential Weapons Crafting
In the current crafting method, you take one to five raw materials and can combine them into a finished item. It works, it's been that way for years, etc.  In some cases, you might use just one material and find that the finished item references techniques that you weren't expecting (such as blackening a blade) or use materials that were never provided (hot-pink leather around the handle of a sword).

What I would like to work towards is breaking that crafting process down to making the individual components, where applicable.  So, say you just had "a long piece of bone".
>craft bone
You could craft that into:
a simple bone longsword (little more than sharpened bone)
a long bone blade (weapon component, usable as a weapon but lacks a hilt)

Once you crafted a long bone blade, you would then need to craft a hilt, and would have options for the materials, allow different kinds of leather to be wrapped around it, and perhaps different styles of hilt. Some simple and intuitive, others not so much.  For this example, say you have "a generic tree branch".
>craft branch
You could craft that into:
a simple sword hilt

So you make that and...
>craft hilt blade
You could craft that into:
a wooden-hilted bone longsword

In the process I have in mind, crafting a hilt or a blade would destroy some materials in the event of failure, and some recipes may be clan specific.  Combining the components would be easy, wouldn't destroy materials on failure, and wouldn't be restricted by clans.

Crafting other weapon types would behave in a similar fashion.


So, that's it in a nutshell.  Discussion or feedback would be valuable, as this project won't move forward without support.

[Alesan]

That sounds fantastic to me.

[Refugee]

I'm not a person who enjoys crafting, but from a teambuilding point of view I think it'd be great.  As a master crafter you could give your minions the beginning steps of a project and put the touch of greatness on it at the end yourself. 

[Armaddict]

I think it's a marvelous idea.

However, while analyze is nice and working as intended...I feel that finding out how to make some things is entirely...meh.  I'm not sure if this will help, unless, as you say, you make it fully customizeable, i.e. I can make hilts out of 3 different kinds of wood, and 4 bone blades, and each one of them ends up making their own sort of weapon.  And then a step further, where this hilt is made out of a piece of wood and this polished gemstone, then this crossguard is made of this...the combinations get up there pretty fast.  Which is good.  But only going halfway with an idea like this only makes crafting less appealing.

Things get pretty frustrating when I hear about how this object seems straightforward, but it turns out that it requires this certain type of leather cord that is in no way shape or form referenced anywhere in the description, pretty much requiring that whole awkward 'Let me analyze your gear' conversation.

I'd like to see things be a lot more 'experimentation friendly' for crafters.  Granted.  I do not play crafters often (it's been a long time), but this is the problem I had that made me decide to -stop- playing them.

[wizturbo]

It seems like a better model for crafting then the current one, but I worry that the amount of work it'll take to implement could be better spent on something "new".

I do kinda worry about how this can complicate crafting though.  Needing to get your hands on a "wooden hilt" instead of the "wooden-hilted obsidian sword" to find out that's it made with a specific kind of branch would be annoying.

[Armaddict]

It seems like a better model for crafting then the current one, but I worry that the amount of work it'll take to implement could be better spent on something "new".

Was about to edit to add something like this.

This seems like a lot of work.  If it's done fully, I think it would be very nice, to see some more degree of PC to PC trade for people with much different looks from each other.  But we've also got a whole lot of things that the players have been talking about wanting, even requiring some of the same sort of work with the item database.

Seems like if we wanted this put in...scrapping what we have and starting fresh could allow all item-related ideas, including this one, would combine the workloads but not be building up onto something that we already want changes on, thus adding to the 'ball of yarn' coding/database problem.

[Alesan]

I definitely want the guessing game to get the right ingredients to go away a little. If it's a lot more intuitive, that would make this system very, very cool.

[Majikal]

I would like a more freeform type of crafting system like outlined, if it was a simple make/switch pieces in the grand scheme of item crafting that would be awesome. If it was a basic crafting system but you got to tag your own adjectives onto the finished product, that would be awesome. I've seen both styles in a MUD and it allowed for a lot of customization and creativity.

I hate that with our current crafting systems we have SO many awesome crafts that have literally been lost to time. And so many simple things that just don't have a recipe. I do my best to rebirth one or two old crafts now and then when I play a capable pc because the guessing game is just kind of silly for a lot of stuff and nobody would ever put those things together.

>Think Need to learn how to make something other than bone longsword, I wonder...

>feel an idea coming...

>craft silk bone fat dye coin gurth stone into a coin-tassled shell-bladed knife with a silk-wrapped hilt
You begin crafting

[Barsook]

Yes please!

[Rokal]

I actually love this, and think it would add a nice touch to weapons crafting - i think the salarr crafters who spent time makign weapons would really enjoy something like this.

I would, it adds a nice touch to any weapon made, and opens up new possiblites for master crafts, though im not sure how open ended the idea is.

One person mastercrafts a new hilt - it could be used for all sorts of sword blades, but the hilt is described differently in the finished product?

things like that are what came to mind.

It just seems neat, and would really allow for group craft projects.

[CodeMaster]

I love the idea.  But...

One of the problems with the existing crafting system -- at least for me -- is I find I sometimes run into inexplicable dead ends.  I'll have components that I really feel should fit together (some of them might even be component parts, like a bolt shaft and various other arrow components), and then they don't, no matter how many combinations of


craft 1.item 2.item 3.item into ...
...ad nauseum


..I try.

It's not a big deal that they don't fit together.  But it gets added to some subconscious mental tally of things that don't quite work.  It takes away a bit from the game's lustre.

Other posters in this thread say this new idea looks like a lot of work -- and I can't help but agree.  If a system like this were to be approached and then only partially completed, crafting could end up feeling like a broken no-man's land.

[Zenith]

I think this idea has a lot of merit, but there are some potential problems as well.

First, I love this idea. I think it would be a pretty big improvement on the current system, which is rather unintuitive. I am very much in the minority of players in that I LOVE crafting and really dislike fighting, so the crafting system is certainly something I have a lot of interest in.

Sequential Weapons Crafting
In the current crafting method, you take one to five raw materials and can combine them into a finished item. It works, it's been that way for years, etc.  In some cases, you might use just one material and find that the finished item references techniques that you weren't expecting (such as blackening a blade) or use materials that were never provided (hot-pink leather around the handle of a sword).

This statement confuses me a little in that by your own examples, it wouldn't solve the problem of having a fire-blackened blade or needing hot pink leather unless you are planning on greatly expanding the number of steps to create "a fire-blackened, pink-handled greatsword of awesomeness."

One person mastercrafts a new hilt - it could be used for all sorts of sword blades, but the hilt is described differently in the finished product things like that are what came to mind.

This is actually one of the big problems I see. If you mastercraft a new hilt, all you've made is a hilt. Now how does that hilt become other weapons? Does each one need to be Mastercrafted? Do all current sword/dagger/axe crafts need to be updated to take advantage of that hilt? Who is going to write all of the finished objects and crafts for a single hilt that could be combined with (total guess here) dozens of different blades, and even more if you add different techniques? Mastercrafted objects are already painfully slow and this could make them even harder to accomplish anything truly new.

I am all in favor of making some changes to the crafting system (especially to make it easier to use and more intuitive), and I think this is a solid idea. But I do wonder what it means for further innovation of the system and whether it would be implemented across all crafting skills in the future.

[Norcal]

Its a good idea, and I think it already exists to some extent (arrows for example).  I was just thinking of using the idea on a current project I am working on IC.

However I would like to see it -in addition to- and not as a replacement for our existing crafting system, which allows for a lot of imagination and detailed descriptions.

You could come up with some really complex designs using this system, and they would be true master crafts. Great idea Taijan!

[Pale Horse]

Along with Zenith, I am one of those players who enjoys the "other" aspects of Armageddon above it's combat, crafting being very high up there.  I'm a tactile individual in RL and making things with my hands is a source of joy to me.

I am in favor of the proposed crafting system idea, as much now as I was when it was debuted during the days of Arm 2.0.

But, like wizturbo mentioned, I fear that it will consume a great deal of time and effort and we might loose some of the fine description options that mastercrafters come up with.  Not that this couldn't be addressed with tweaks to the submission processes and policy for mastercrafts.

[Centurion]

I like this idea a lot. It's a big job however, but as weapon crafting and armour is a big part of the crafting game in ARM, it could weigh up . I'd like to tag on another addition to the idea, and that's crafting delays. The delays would mostly apply to the blade section of the weapons, as once you had all essential parts to make a sword for example, assembling shouldn't take as long.

This is how I'd see a simple bone longsword being made:
a long, bone swordblade
a bone sword crossguard
an agafari wood sword hilt
a stone pommel

It would be great to have a variable code that for example you could have all those same components, but instead of 'an agafari wood sword hilt', you can have 'an agafari, black-leather sword hilt', then when you assemble the 'a simple bone longsword', the main description has just the change in colour for the sword hilt. If you had this sort of variable code, you wouldn't then need to make x number of actual different sword items just so you could pick different colours in the sword hilts. Of course that sort of code could work for all the different parts of the sword as well.

After you made your 'a simple bone longsword', perhaps then once you become a skilled crafter, you can work the blade to make it sharper, so another craft could change the weapon into 'a sharp, bone longsword'.

I really like the possibilities and would love to see this sort of thing.

Just something extra... I'm not sure if the sort of variable code is set up in ARM for the clothing, or if there is individual crafts for different coloured items using the same material. If it does already exist, the 'Sequential Weapon Crafting' shouldn't be as difficult, I'd hope!

[The Silence of the Erdlus]

Clay hilts.

[Synthesis]

This would be a huge pain in the ass unless all the sequential-crafting items were 99% mix-and-match.

Like...

a long obsidian blade
a long bone blade
an intricately-carved ivory hilt
a plain bone hilt

Would craft into:

an ivory-hilted obsidian longsword
an obsidian longsword
an ivory-hilted bone longsword
a bone longsword

Personally, I think a lot of the mix-and-match items could just default to the regular shit that's already craftable.  For example, a long bone blade with any plain <material> hilt would craft into a plain "a bone longsword."  Having a wooden vs. bone vs. stone vs. whatever hilt shouldn't affect the value or the description if it's really that plain.  Just adjust the relevant descriptions so that the material type on the non-important parts is unspecified.  It would save a lot of building and/or coding shenanigans.

[Armaddict]

As a note:

If you did do this, it would be nice to have overlap from other crafting skills, as well, if possible.  i.e. Woodworkers making wooden hilts.  Such would allow subclass-crafters to combine forces to make money together viably, and hopefully, less random shit all over the place since coordination would result in product, instead of waiting around until you found a weaponscrafter.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I am very much in support of this idea. A question, however ... are we talking about the advent of new code to handle crafting, or a revamping of the existing recipes to allow for this? I have no issue with this either way, but am mostly curious here as to the method.

[catchall]

If only the recipes are to be adjusted toward this new paradigm, then this will be a detrimental change to crafting, for reasons already mentioned by others upthread:  'analyze' will only look one level down and will now only be able to identify intermediate parts instead of raw materials, which is normally more important to know.  Let's say we fix this by having 'analyze' act recursively down to the base materials--that wasn't too bad.  We are still dealing with a system where every time a new modular component is added, increasingly more and more new items and recipes must be created along with them. 

This kind of administrative overhead cannot be underestimated.  It's like filling your car with cinder blocks on the way to buy more cinder blocks.  Now every weaponscrafter wanting to make a fully custom sword is told they need to do three mastercrafts, one for a hilt, one for a blade, and one for the sword.  For the first two, they're told there will probably be a 2-3 month backlog for the dozens of item and recipe updates that will be needed.  And this a realistic characterization:If final assembly is to be an easy task as described, then we can forget about Blade X and Hilt Y being the ingredients for a dozen different weapons of different qualities, with skill differentiating what a crafter can produce.  Quality will have to be imparted by crafting a high-skill part, which means tons of new objects. The productive capacities of volunteer builders will be pushed to the breaking point and diverted away from activities with greater value for the game. 

It's a different matter if the crafting code is updated for truly dynamic item creation.  That's an ambitious project, but one that could potentially bring a lot of future value.  However, if the proposal is to merely simulate a dynamic system using a long list of objects in a database and a long list of recipes, with essentially the same code we have now, then I can state unequivocally that this would be far more of a hassle than a benefit, and mostly for staff.  Complexity for complexity's sake is never a good thing.

I'm also not sure how this approach would address the issues mentioned.  If there is a purple cord or other random object needed, the player can only identify that if they use analyze or they already have the purple cord and happen to try it.  I don't see how that's improved in this proposal, and it may be made worse if analyze only looks one level deep.  As far as I can tell, the benefit to the player would be that it would make 'bottom-up' crafting easier (starting from a bunch of raw materials, as opposed to 'top-down,' or starting with a final product and analyze).  The player would have a better chance of finding intermediate components to craft her materials into than if having to shoot for final products.  Top-down crafting would actually get more difficult as analyze would reveal intermediate components.  Ultimately it is an enormous amount of work for a transitory "wow factor" the first time a player snaps together a hilt and blade and it reminds them of Legos.  This will be paid for in the form of hundreds of hours of ongoing upkeep and support. 


Honestly, the best bang/buck ratio in crafting would probably be achieved simply by making more common and useful items craftable.

[bardlyone]

Everything this guy said but especially the last part.

Honestly, the best bang/buck ratio in crafting would probably be achieved simply by making more common and useful items craftable.

1000000000000000000x agreed. I'd much rather see more than a few thousand of the tens of thousands of already existing items become craftable, than to see a more energy channeled into a different sort of crafting system project.

[Alesan]

...

This guy... really has a point.

[Malifaxis]

Everything this guy said but especially the last part.

Honestly, the best bang/buck ratio in crafting would probably be achieved simply by making more common and useful items craftable.

1000000000000000000x agreed. I'd much rather see more than a few thousand of the tens of thousands of already existing items become craftable, than to see a more energy channeled into a different sort of crafting system project.

So be the change.  Start a MC sub, start doing that.  Others have.  With enough communal effort, we can make tons of very common craftables.

As for the original idea, I love it.

As for Catchall's statements, I am certain the staff would include the basic items without them needing to be MC'd.  Take the basics, take your specific other stuff, and make it your own MC that is something awesome.

[bardlyone]

Everything this guy said but especially the last part.

Honestly, the best bang/buck ratio in crafting would probably be achieved simply by making more common and useful items craftable.

1000000000000000000x agreed. I'd much rather see more than a few thousand of the tens of thousands of already existing items become craftable, than to see a more energy channeled into a different sort of crafting system project.

So be the change.  Start a MC sub, start doing that.  Others have.  With enough communal effort, we can make tons of very common craftables.

As for the original idea, I love it.

As for Catchall's statements, I am certain the staff would include the basic items without them needing to be MC'd.  Take the basics, take your specific other stuff, and make it your own MC that is something awesome.

I would if I could. I'm not allowed to mastercraft. Even if I had a merchant pc alive for RL months with a dozen mastered craft skills. Which is something recruiting characters whose players know they're hiring a merchant might want to keep in mind. Because if I can't that's at least 1. Who's to say I'm the only one?

Aside from that, though, 'be the change' will never happen for the same reason it didn't happen in real life. And not just because of the fact that that isn't what Ghandi said. Sourcing the claim of course, here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/opinion/falser-words-were-never-spoken.html?_r=0

"there is no reliable documentary evidence for the quotation. The closest verifiable remark we have from Gandhi is this: "If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. ... We need not wait to see what others do."

Here, Gandhi is telling us that personal and social transformation go hand in hand, but there is no suggestion in his words that personal transformation is enough. In fact, for Gandhi, the struggle to bring about a better world involved not only stringent self-denial and rigorous adherence to the philosophy of nonviolence; it also involved a steady awareness that one person, alone, can't change anything, an awareness that unjust authority can be overturned only by great numbers of people working together with discipline and persistence."

[Norcal]

Huh?

[musashi]

... yeah ...

[Taijan]

The means that we have now to craft are the means that would be used, as I'm not talking about an overhaul to the whole crafting process.  The limitations that've already been discussed are big points of hesitation - using the means available, it would indeed be a lot of work.

The yea's and maybe's/no's are pretty even.  For those who said no - just out of curiosity, is it the overall concept that elicited a no, or was it just the thought of trying to make it work with the current crafting system?

[CodeMaster]

The means that we have now to craft are the means that would be used, as I'm not talking about an overhaul to the whole crafting process.  The limitations that've already been discussed are big points of hesitation - using the means available, it would indeed be a lot of work.

The yea's and maybe's/no's are pretty even.  For those who said no - just out of curiosity, is it the overall concept that elicited a no, or was it just the thought of trying to make it work with the current crafting system?

Love the concept.

It's just its inability to scale that strikes me the most.  At first it'll be pretty easy: 3 hilts, 3 blades -- only 9 items to describe.  But at some point there might be 25 (or 100!) blades in the game, and every time a player wants to make a hilt, someone will have to create 25 new sword items.  If swords and hilts get added in equal volume, the growth rate of the number of new items is quadratic in the number of mastercrafts.

(The only way it would scale reasonably is if it were fully automated.)

So I guess my big worry is that some hilts won't work with some blades and a merchant will have to negotiaate the frustrating idiosyncrasies of this system rather than feel like they're playing lego (to crib from catchall)

[edit: I was a maybe so I'll shadup]

[bardlyone]

I love "the idea" of it. But adding more idiosyncracies to an already (at times) frustratingly inconsistent crafting system feels like a game of diminishing returns unless it winds up replacing entire fair size swathes of things, and/or making up a fairly large amount of craftables in and of itself. Especially when there are literally dozens of crafting skills and it would affect only one of them.