Why do Studded Leather refinements not work on Studded Mempos?

[Dantes]

As the title says.

Thanks

 

[Merus]

Peppermint swirls... Duh!

*please note that you are playing Ultima Online™ which is not required to be consistent with conventional logic or itself. Thank you for supporting DAOC.

 

[Spock's Beard]

I like how it took two years for anyone to even notice, apparently.

 

[BeaIank]

Try studded samurai refinements on those.

 

[Merus]

While I liked the idea of the refinements (DCI vs Resist caps) the implementation is so massively bloated with needless complexity it ruined it for me.

 

[Yadd of Legends]

Give me the higher resist caps without the lower DCI and I'll think it worth the trouble

 

[Spock's Beard]

Try studded samurai refinements on those.

ROFL, of COURSE there are separate refinements for regular studded leather armor and samurai-style studded leather armor. They missed absolutely no opportunity to make this system a bloated trainwreck.

 

[BeaIank]

ROFL, of COURSE there are separate refinements for regular studded leather armor and samurai-style studded leather armor. They missed absolutely no opportunity to make this system a bloated trainwreck.

And likewise for plate maille too.
Ain't that wonderful?

 

[Uvtha]

ROFL, of COURSE there are separate refinements for regular studded leather armor and samurai-style studded leather armor. They missed absolutely no opportunity to make this system a bloated trainwreck.

Yeah, like I have said before that system was like textbook how NOT to design. I have zero clue how something so terribly, horrrrrribly designed system, that while in testing players clearly outlined why it was so inept and why no one would would use it and they went ahead anyway. Surprise, surprise... no one uses it.
Then to add insult to injury they punish us further by adding in an item we must BUY an item to try (and fail) to fix one of the major flaws (that was repetidly explained by players before implimentation) instead of just actually fixing the stupid thing.

Sorry to go one but this system to me is one of the worst bits of professional game design ive ever encountered.

 

[HoneythornGump]

I use refinements and find them very beneficial.

However, like others I hate how the system is implemented.

I hate how they don't stack. I hate how there are so many kinds.

I also hate how with invulnerability there is a 10% modifier chance for a 5th bonus. This really ticks me off, what this really needed? You couldn't just give us 5. I've probably burned 20+ invulnerability trying to get all 75s. Really ticks me off the way that was implemented!

Refinements could do with a major overhaul.

 

[Dantes]

Lucky for me I was just going to 50 DCI and the 'of Defense' washes worked just fine for me. Thanks everyone

 

[Uvtha]

I use refinements and find them very beneficial.

However, like others I hate how the system is implemented.

I hate how they don't stack. I hate how there are so many kinds.

I also hate how with invulnerability there is a 10% modifier chance for a 5th bonus. This really ticks me off, what this really needed? You couldn't just give us 5. I've probably burned 20+ invulnerability trying to get all 75s. Really ticks me off the way that was implemented!

Refinements could do with a major overhaul.

Seriously. The lamest thing is that the system DOES have a cool function. 5 steps make the system usable, and still maintain the "not done in a day" issue which was given as the reason for it being absurdly complicated.

1. Keep the 5 levels, but remove the specific armor types (so stupid) and the secondary conversion items (Malleable alloy, etc) and the different types for dci and resist. That strips the items down to only 3, one for each crafting skill (Blacksmith, Tailor, Carpenter). Instead of a unique item for DCI or Resist, just have a gump to select which bonus you want to apply. If that idea doesn't appeal you can keep both art assets, and have a total of 6 items.
2. MAKE THEM STACK. That leaves the grand total for the system at 15-30 STACKABLE items. Compare that to the current 200+ UNSTACKABLE items in the system. Just... horrible.
3. Make the bonus static. Defense is 1%, Protection is 2%, Hardening is 3%, Fort is 4% Invuln is 5%. None of that stupid chance nonsense that just forces a needless rng roll on you to potentially spoil your work.
4. Have them wear off like dragon Barding. This keeps demand up for the items, not relegating it to one and done status as a system.
5. Still require crafting to apply the base item to armor pieces, but also allow crafters the ability to make deeds to apply them that anyone can use, again like dragon barding. Allowing people to stock up and alter/replace their bonuses as they choose, while giving crafters another useful thing to sell.

Simplifies and cleans up the system by like 95%, keeps it in consistent demand, and makes it usable for everyone. You wouldn't even need to adjust drop rates or sources.

 

[Dantes]

Seriously. The lamest thing is that the system DOES have a cool function. 5 steps make the system usable, and still maintain the "not done in a day" issue which was given as the reason for it being absurdly complicated.

1. Keep the 5 levels, but remove the specific armor types (so stupid) and the secondary conversion items (Malleable alloy, etc) and the different types for dci and resist. That strips the items down to only 3, one for each crafting skill (Blacksmith, Tailor, Carpenter). Instead of a unique item for DCI or Resist, just have a gump to select which bonus you want to apply. If that idea doesn't appeal you can keep both art assets, and have a total of 6 items.
2. MAKE THEM STACK. That leaves the grand total for the system at 15-30 STACKABLE items. Compare that to the current 200+ UNSTACKABLE items in the system. Just... horrible.
3. Make the bonus static. Defense is 1%, Protection is 2%, Hardening is 3%, Fort is 4% Invuln is 5%. None of that stupid chance nonsense that just forces a needless rng roll on you to potentially spoil your work.
4. Have them wear off like dragon Barding. This keeps demand up for the items, not relegating it to one and done status as a system.
5. Still require crafting to apply the base item to armor pieces, but also allow crafters the ability to make deeds to apply them that anyone can use, again like dragon barding. Allowing people to stock up and alter/replace their bonuses as they choose, while giving crafters another useful thing to sell.

Simplifies and cleans up the system by like 95%, keeps it in consistent demand, and makes it usable for everyone. You wouldn't even need to adjust drop rates or sources.

I like all of them except #4

 

[Uvtha]

I like all of them except #4

I figured most people wouldn't like that part, but its really not a big deal. The whole point of it of course is to satisfy the justification given by the devs for why its so complicated, because they wanted the system to last in terms of giving people something to do. Require it be reapplied, even infrequently would be a better compromise IMO.

Ideally I would remove it too, but ideally I would also have exceptionally higher item loss levels, and different itemization altogether.

 

[Deraj]

Make the bonus static. Defense is 1%, Protection is 2%, Hardening is 3%, Fort is 4% Invuln is 5%. None of that stupid chance nonsense that just forces a needless rng roll on you to potentially spoil your work.

This is the most confounding part about refinements, above all else. So after all the planning and crafting and expensive ingredients and tools to fine tune an item in accordance to a specific plan, a player is to give that carefully crafted piece over to the RNG machine?

The crafting process should provide randomness near the beginning, but exactness and precision at its end.

I figured most people wouldn't like that part, but its really not a big deal. The whole point of it of course is to satisfy the justification given by the devs for why its so complicated, because they wanted the system to last in terms of giving people something to do. Require it be reapplied, even infrequently would be a better compromise IMO.

Ideally I would remove it too, but ideally I would also have exceptionally higher item loss levels, and different itemization altogether.

I'm always in favor of things wearing out, so long as the availability justifies the cost.

 

[Spock's Beard]

I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone anywhere (except @Kyronix ) give this system an unambiguous thumbs up. The best you ever hear is "I like the buffs but everything you do to get them is agony!" and frankly even that level of endorsement is pretty damn rare. For the most part people never even took note of this system.

 

[Uvtha]

This is the most confounding part about refinements, above all else. So after all the planning and crafting and expensive ingredients and tools to fine tune an item in accordance to a specific plan, a player is to give that carefully crafted piece over to the RNG machine?

The crafting process should provide randomness near the beginning, but exactness and precision at its end.

Just another example of needless over complication in order to stretch out limited content.

My thoughts on itemization/crafting in general are Basic crafted<basic drops<rare crafted=rare drops, with near full item loss. Crafting being 0% random. Basically your "standard" gear would be crafted, you augment that over time with magic items you find, and once you get established you start building around one or two core "rare" powerful rare to craft or rare to find bits.