|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||||||
|
P99 Tradeskilling Skill-ups Are Unclassically Tied to Success Rate
I thought I filed a bug on this before, but I can't find it so I'm filing a new one.
Assertion: In classic EverQuest, tradeskill skill-up rates were not dependent on whether the attempt succeeded or not: you had the same chance of skilling-up on a success or failure. What P99 Does: As best I can tell, P99 bases its formula off a later formula provided by a dev (I think from 2004). That formula gives a greater chance of skill-ups when the attempt suceeds. Evidence #1: Memory I know memory is crap, but tradeskills were my jam on live. Instead of reaching max level I was running around collecting components for combines, and spending way too much time on EQTraders.com. When you're level 30 (or whatever I was with Loramin 1.0 at the time), focused on tradeskills, and have too much time at your job to browse the Internet, you read every last thing you can on how to skill-up faster, and ... ... the overwhelming consensus at the time was that success had no impact on skill-ups. Evidence #2: EQTraders.com Unfortunately, EQTraders.com uses a robots.txt file which blocks the Wayback Machine, so there is no way to see the best possible classic evidence here [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] However, their forum does go back to 2002 (ie. just post-classic). If you just browse to the start of the forum, and read all the posts there, you'll notice something in aggregate: there's lots of "how should I get this skill from this level to that level?" But in ever reply to every such post, the only concerns anyone ever mentions are the cost or difficulty of obtaining the components; no one ever says "do this recipe because it's trivial is lower and you'll succeed more". Evidence #3: EQTraders.com 01/2003 Thread on This Exact Topic The best evidence I could find (and I admit it's not a slam dunk) was that someone asked a question about this very issue in January of 2003: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also of course there's the problem of players back then being dumb. But tradeskillers absolutely did record their results (you can find many examples in that forum in fact), and math nerds (some of whom you can also find chiming in in those forums) did their best to separate fact from fiction. Again, the best evidence of that was no doubt on the blocked site, but the point is tradeskillers were uniquely focused on statistically relevant data in a way that most other "I think X works this way" flawed player opinions weren't.
__________________
Loramin Frostseer, Oracle of the Tribunal <Anonymous> and Fan of the "Where To Go For XP/For Treasure?" Guides Anyone can improve the wiki! If you are new to the Blue server, you can improve the wiki to earn a "welcome package" of up to 2k+ platinum! Message me for details. | ||||||
Last edited by loramin; 04-09-2020 at 12:16 PM..
|
#2
|
||||
|
http://mboards.eqtraders.com/eq/foru...nker-handout)=
I think the old formula is the classic one. Quote:
I’ve found no evidence that this formula is in fact the 2.0 version rather than the 1.0 version.
__________________
| |||
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|