Critical Fail Combines are Amazing

[Knuckle]

Imagine spending a small fortune to complete a quest and having to organize a raid for a tedious mob all so you can fail a combine at a trivial combine. Yeah sorry you can no longer advance your skills from making this item. Yeah sorry you lacked the skills to fashion the item together. GO FUCK YOURSELF

[Ciderpress]

No see it's teaching you an important lesson about hubris and over-confidence though

[Duik]

You mustn't be tall enough.

[Bardp1999]

What a loser

[WarpathEQ]

Sounds like someone failed a Garzicore combine

[kjs86z2]

shits classic do it again op

[aaezil]

Yes good let the salt flow through you

[Duik]

Can we get total count of the peeps who have also failed a trivial combine from this quest?

[Duik]

Cant believe we didnt get a "sorry you dont got" yet.

Disappointed.

[Jimjam]

Cant believe we didnt get a "sorry you dont got" yet.

Disappointed.

oof. sorry you don't got "sorry you don't got" retort.

[WarpathEQ]

Can we get total count of the peeps who have also failed a trivial combine from this quest?

3548547394

There is a book of the fallen section near the bottom of the page where people are named and shamed.

[WarpathEQ]

3548547394

There is a book of the fallen section near the bottom of the page where people are named and shamed.

https://wiki.project1999.com/The_Spirit_of_Garzicor

[Balimon]

It happens...generally people feel bad for you and help though..keep at it my dude

[Duik]

THIS IS NOT A ROUND ROBIN TURN IN. IF YOU TURN IN AND YOU MISS YOUR ITEM, MUST COMPLETELY REDO THE QUEST

That'd be some oopsies as well wouldn't it?

One page i read made it look lime it was a round robin. Not that I would ever to this quest. It us interesting how much pain this game gives, and we give it the chance.

I cried when i finally got haddin to pop and killed him. No earring.

[Naethyn]

https://wiki.project1999.com/TradeskillTable

[Reiwa]

https://wiki.project1999.com/TradeskillTable

335 is the hardest recipe I've seen.

[Naethyn]

do tell

[Reiwa]

do tell

molym8tAs7E

[Jimjam]

The problem isn’t necessarily the triv/fail system but the recipes.

The system was designed for relatively easily sourced components (steel boning and hq pelts) with low stakes results (leather +2 armour).

The problem is the new quests are using the tradeskill system outside the scope of it’s design.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The problem isn’t necessarily the triv/fail system but the recipes.

The system was designed for relatively easily sourced components (steel boning and hq pelts) with low stakes results (leather +2 armour).

The problem is the new quests are using the tradeskill system outside the scope of it’s design.

They could have made the quest no fail. They clearly wanted 5% of the playerbase to suffer. Same with the Shawl quest.

[Jimjam]

Maybe they wanted to let people suffer, maybe the guy who made the quest either didn't care or didn't remember about the no fail flag (or perhaps the flag wasn't flaggable for whatever reason). Certainly an interesting point upon which to muse.

[Goregasmic]

I failed the shawl 6th shawl 6 times between 163-168 tailoring. There's like a sub 1% probability of this happening. I did most of it during double drop rate christmas week so it wasn't too bad but still time consuming with how rare the siren hair and wolf whiskers are. I still need a swordfish tooth to finish 7th but I tried SG at 58 and it just wasn't gonna work.

I'm still mad AF at the whole tailoring thing, from 158 you basically have to craft 262 othmir fur caps or 335 wyvern masks unless you're a few select races... and you only have 5% chance to successfully combine until you're 200+. And most of the gear made is garbage anyway or there are much cheaper alternatives out there. I guess if you're one of the first 250 tailors early velious it may be worth it but at this point not so much.

If I'm ever guilded I'd still do spirit of grazicor for the ring because I apparently like suffering.

[Salaryman]

RED99

I have the shawl

RED99

[Cecily]

I knew you failed the Dragonborne Miyazaki just from the thread title.

[loramin]

I'm still mad AF at the whole tailoring thing, from 158 you basically have to craft 262 othmir fur caps or 335 wyvern masks unless you're a few select races... and you only have 5% chance to successfully combine until you're 200+.

Successes don't matter for skill-ups ... or at least they shouldn't (they didn't in classic, and there were massive threads on the EQ Traders forum which proved as much). They do matter for whether you get a piece of worthless gear, but who cares about the gear?

Now, I have heard from people who think successes do matter. I suspect they were just confused, but I guess it's possible if Nilbog coded skillups unclassically.

[Goregasmic]

Successes don't matter for skill-ups ... or at least they shouldn't (they didn't in classic, and there were massive threads on the EQ Traders forum which proved as much). They do matter for whether you get a piece of worthless gear, but who cares about the gear?

Now, I have heard from people who think successes do matter. I suspect they were just confused, but I guess it's possible if Nilbog coded skillups unclassically.

It does according to the eqtraders calculator but it is current for live IIRC so maybe they modified that later in the timeline. If it doesn't that's probably where people get the misconception from.

Tailoring makes some good gear, even some pre-raid BIS but it was so poorly designed it isn't worth working on unless you're doing shawl or you're a completionist.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I failed the shawl 6th shawl 6 times between 163-168 tailoring. There's like a sub 1% probability of this happening. I did most of it during double drop rate christmas week so it wasn't too bad but still time consuming with how rare the siren hair and wolf whiskers are. I still need a swordfish tooth to finish 7th but I tried SG at 58 and it just wasn't gonna work.

I'm still mad AF at the whole tailoring thing, from 158 you basically have to craft 262 othmir fur caps or 335 wyvern masks unless you're a few select races... and you only have 5% chance to successfully combine until you're 200+. And most of the gear made is garbage anyway or there are much cheaper alternatives out there. I guess if you're one of the first 250 tailors early velious it may be worth it but at this point not so much.

If I'm ever guilded I'd still do spirit of grazicor for the ring because I apparently like suffering.

Yeah I tried to level up tailoring past 158, and didn't get any results after thousands of plat. Decided to just do Shawl 6 at 158. Did that on two characters, and I only failed Shawl 6 twice in total I think.

[Goregasmic]

Yeah I've heard a couple times about people spending over 100k to max tailoring. If you don't have cultural tailoring the cheapest way is probably a multi generational genocide of otters. Most other stuff requires a lot of velium tempers and expensive ench vials. If you can't farm otters you're stuck with wyvern hide masks.

[loramin]

It does according to the eqtraders calculator but it is current for live IIRC so maybe they modified that later in the timeline. If it doesn't that's probably where people get the misconception from.

That would make sense. Sadly, the original EQ Traders forums have been lost to time, as they're not on the Wayback Machine. I even emailed the "den mother" of EQ Traders, and she said she'd look and see if she had the old posts ... but then never wrote back, so I assume not even she has them.

Still, I'm 100% certain that tradeskill success (in classic) did not influence skillup success. This was something tradeskillers back then were very keen to know, so one tradeskiller finally did a series of tests, which proved that there was no connection.

At the time, this thread was "big news" among the classic tradeskilling community, so I remember it well, but now that it's lost it's probably the only "proof" that ever existed (because proving it required so much work that only a tradeskill addict on the tradeskill forum would conduct it).

[Goregasmic]

That would make sense. Sadly, the original EQ Traders forums have been lost to time, as they're not on the Wayback Machine. I even emailed the "den mother" of EQ Traders, and she said she'd look and see if she had the old posts ... but then never wrote back, so I assume not even she has them.

Still, I'm 100% certain that tradeskill success (in classic) did not influence skillup success. This was something tradeskillers back then were very keen to know, so one tradeskiller finally did a series of tests, which proved that there was no connection.

At the time, this thread was "big news" among the classic tradeskilling community, so I remember it well, but now that it's lost it's probably the only "proof" that ever existed (because proving it required so much work that only a tradeskill addict on the tradeskill forum would conduct it).

Do you remember what his testing looked like or not at all?

I guess you could add up how many failure/success you get and then check the skill ups proportions. I'm not sure all tradeskills are governed by the same formula though.

[loramin]

Do you remember what his testing looked like or not at all?

I guess you could add up how many failure/success you get and then check the skill ups proportions. I'm not sure all tradeskills are governed by the same formula though.

I don't remember the exact the details (it's been over two decades), but basically he did a bunch of combines with a trivial that was close (eg. tradeskill 100, trivial 110), and a bunch of combines with a trivial that was way far off (eg. trivial 200).

He did a lot of combines (which was a big deal back then: people didn't have the plat/items to just do a ton of combines at once), and found that he got the same skill-up rate regardless of the trivial.

[cd288]

That would make sense. Sadly, the original EQ Traders forums have been lost to time, as they're not on the Wayback Machine. I even emailed the "den mother" of EQ Traders, and she said she'd look and see if she had the old posts ... but then never wrote back, so I assume not even she has them.

Still, I'm 100% certain that tradeskill success (in classic) did not influence skillup success. This was something tradeskillers back then were very keen to know, so one tradeskiller finally did a series of tests, which proved that there was no connection.

At the time, this thread was "big news" among the classic tradeskilling community, so I remember it well, but now that it's lost it's probably the only "proof" that ever existed (because proving it required so much work that only a tradeskill addict on the tradeskill forum would conduct it).

Meaning the trade skill up percentage is just pure RNG? And a failure has just as much chance as increasing it as a successful combine?

[Goregasmic]

Meaning the trade skill up percentage is just pure RNG? And a failure has just as much chance as increasing it as a successful combine?

I don't think skill up chance is pure RNG, it definitely follows a curve. The higher you get the harder it is to skill up. When you first start out it is like 33% chance to skill up and in the 160s its like 12% and in the 200s like 6%. I've observed it through different tradeskills a well.

Your int/wis (or str/dex on some tradeskills) will affect your skill up chance but success rate seems fixed for a given level. What's "debated" is if it is easier to skill up on a success or not.

[cd288]

Yeah sorry I misspoke. Figured there was some scaling with level. Thanks!

[Knuckle]

after a 5 1/2 month break from eq following this trade failure I have reached nirvana and realized the devs coded this for 5% of the playerbase to briefly escape the purgatory of everquest.

[loramin]

Meaning the trade skill up percentage is just pure RNG? And a failure has just as much chance as increasing it as a successful combine?

Yes

[Reiwa]

I don't think skill up chance is pure RNG, it definitely follows a curve. The higher you get the harder it is to skill up. When you first start out it is like 33% chance to skill up and in the 160s its like 12% and in the 200s like 6%. I've observed it through different tradeskills a well.

Your int/wis (or str/dex on some tradeskills) will affect your skill up chance but success rate seems fixed for a given level. What's "debated" is if it is easier to skill up on a success or not.

Darchon/Daldaen spreadsheet may govern directly in classic.

[Vaarsuvius]

Yes

If memory serves, one's skillup rate with a failed combine is about half that of a successful one

According to EQTraders calculator with 160 Tailoring:
https://www.eqtraders.com/calculators/main.php?menustr=130000000000

Success chance = 55.5%
Chance of skill up on Success: 20%, on failure: 12%, overall 16.44%

[loramin]

If memory serves, one's skillup rate with a failed combine is about half that of a successful one

According to EQTraders calculator with 160 Tailoring:
https://www.eqtraders.com/calculators/main.php?menustr=130000000000

Success chance = 55.5%
Chance of skill up on Success: 20%, on failure: 12%, overall 16.44%

Maybe on live EQ, but not in classic.

[loramin]

And just to clarify, yes the formula did change after the classic era; we know because it caused a bug, and players complained (from 04-13-2005):

First off, if you're over 150 in a Tradeskill, you won't notice the bug, as the bugged code isn't being called... you're now using the new formula (which is working, going from your posts).

The bug makes it very difficult to skillup at low levels in EVERY skill. Tradeskills when your skill is below 150 is still using the original skillup formula, as is every other skill (1hbash, etc.) for the whole path (1-300). Until this is fixed, if you start a new toon, or finally decide to get your Piercing (or Swimming, etc) skill up, you will find it very difficult to skill up (though not impossible).

The bug resulted from code cleanup that occurred at the same time as the new Tradeskill skillup formula, but is not a result of the new formula. The new formula seems to be working correctly. I do not know when a fix for the bug above will go Live.

[WarpathEQ]

My anecdotal experience (no hard data validation has been done) is there seems to be a threshold with the skill level and the primary attribute that contributes to skill up and I've found that when the skill level exceeds the attribute that skill ups are way less common.

I.E. if you have a 150 baking skill and your primary attribute is intelligence you'll see your skill ups move considerably faster if your intelligence is over 150 versus under. Maybe the 2 aren't correlated and its just the attribute being higher contributing regardless of skill level.

The best example I have is jewelcrafting. I was working on skilling up a guild bot at the same time a full geared 255 int enchanter in the guild was also working on skilling up to max jewelcrafting. I spent way more money than him and was no where near max skill by the time he was done and maxed.

[Goregasmic]

My anecdotal experience (no hard data validation has been done) is there seems to be a threshold with the skill level and the primary attribute that contributes to skill up and I've found that when the skill level exceeds the attribute that skill ups are way less common.

I.E. if you have a 150 baking skill and your primary attribute is intelligence you'll see your skill ups move considerably faster if your intelligence is over 150 versus under. Maybe the 2 aren't correlated and its just the attribute being higher contributing regardless of skill level.

The best example I have is jewelcrafting. I was working on skilling up a guild bot at the same time a full geared 255 int enchanter in the guild was also working on skilling up to max jewelcrafting. I spent way more money than him and was no where near max skill by the time he was done and maxed.

The higher your skill up stat is the more chance you have to skill up.

The higher your skill is the least chance you have to skill up.

The closer your are to trivial the more chances you have to skill up.

Success rate is based on skill, stat has no impact.

At 255 main stat, at 1 skill you have 80% chance to skill up on a 15trivial combine but at 249 skill you have 6,45% chance to skill up on a 262 trivial combine. It is like over 1000 combines to get from 148 to 250 tailoring.

[Jimjam]

The higher your skill up stat is the more chance you have to skill up.

The higher your skill is the least chance you have to skill up.

The closer your are to trivial the more chances you have to skill up.

Success rate is based on skill, stat has no impact.

At 255 main stat, at 1 skill you have 80% chance to skill up on a 15trivial combine but at 249 skill you have 6,45% chance to skill up on a 262 trivial combine. It is like over 1000 combines to get from 148 to 250 tailoring.

I always feel like the tradeskills were only really ever intended to reach a triv going up to 100 or maybe a few dozen above that.

[Goregasmic]

I always feel like the tradeskills were only really ever intended to reach a triv going up to 100 or maybe a few dozen above that.

Yeah most tradeskills you're not really getting much over 150.

[WarpathEQ]

The higher your skill up stat is the more chance you have to skill up.

The higher your skill is the least chance you have to skill up.

The closer your are to trivial the more chances you have to skill up.

Success rate is based on skill, stat has no impact.

At 255 main stat, at 1 skill you have 80% chance to skill up on a 15trivial combine but at 249 skill you have 6,45% chance to skill up on a 262 trivial combine. It is like over 1000 combines to get from 148 to 250 tailoring.

I'm calling bluff on that. I know multiple people that leveled up to max jewelcrafting and all spent a roughly similar amount of plat to do it (within a 5kp variance). These folks are enchanter mains with HoT+ gear. I worked on leveling up our shitty guild guild bot enchanter's JC and have gone thousands beyond what anyone else spent and am still in the low 200s. Pretty confident that your character stats matter which is why there are plenty of resources that list the relevant stats for coorelating skills.

[Goregasmic]

I'm calling bluff on that. I know multiple people that leveled up to max jewelcrafting and all spent a roughly similar amount of plat to do it (within a 5kp variance). These folks are enchanter mains with HoT+ gear. I worked on leveling up our shitty guild guild bot enchanter's JC and have gone thousands beyond what anyone else spent and am still in the low 200s. Pretty confident that your character stats matter which is why there are plenty of resources that list the relevant stats for coorelating skills.

I think you misread the first line because it supports your conclusion.

One thing that was clear for me early in my tradeskill journey is you might as well invest in gear to bring that main stat as close to 255 as you can or you're just making it harder on yourself from a cost perspective.

[loramin]

Throughout EQ history there's been a lot of confusion and misinformation about tradeskills (and random EQ "rolls" in general). That being said, investigative tradeskillers have found, for certain, that stats (only) helped your chance to get a skill-up ... as long as the recipe isn't trivial. Converseely, your skill was the only thing that impacted your chance of making something (stats didn't help).

That much was incontrovertible on live (go use https://search.eqarchives.org/?size=n_20_n if you don't believe me). I presume it remains true here, but I could be wrong.

But there's one thing that I think is wrong here, because it's based on the post-classic live tradeskills ... but I've been unable to prove it without the old EQ Traders forum (sadly, the Wayback machine didn't capture it, and when I contacted Niami Den Mother, the site's owner, she said she'd look to see if she had an archive ... and then never emailed me back ... so presumably not even she has one).

That one thing is, whether the combine succeeds or fails, the chance of skill-ing up should be the same. Knowing something like this was huge for live tradeskillers, as you often had stuff you could combine that was above your skill level. If skill-ups depended on success, you really wouldn't want to use those components ... but because it was such useful info, one player did a bunch of combines both ways, and conclusively found that success didn't matter for skillups.

Based on reports I've heard here, it seems skill-ups are more likely with successes, but that's not how classic EQ worked (though it's how it's worked on live since 2004 or so).

[Jimjam]

Throughout EQ history there's been a lot of confusion and misinformation about tradeskills (and random EQ "rolls" in general). That being said, investigative tradeskillers have found, for certain, that stats (only) helped your chance to get a skill-up ... as long as the recipe isn't trivial. Converseely, your skill was the only thing that impacted your chance of making something (stats didn't help).

That much was incontrovertible on live (go use https://search.eqarchives.org/?size=n_20_n if you don't believe me). I presume it remains true here, but I could be wrong.

But there's one thing that I think is wrong here, because it's based on the post-classic live tradeskills ... but I've been unable to prove it without the old EQ Traders forum (sadly, the Wayback machine didn't capture it, and when I contacted Niami Den Mother, the site's owner, she said she'd look to see if she had an archive ... and then never emailed me back ... so presumably not even she has one).

That one thing is, whether the combine succeeds or fails, the chance of skill-ing up should be the same. Knowing something like this was huge for live tradeskillers, as you often had stuff you could combine that was above your skill level. If skill-ups depended on success, you really wouldn't want to use those components ... but because it was such useful info, one player did a bunch of combines both ways, and conclusively found that success didn't matter for skillups.

Based on reports I've heard here, it seems skill-ups are more likely with successes, but that's not how classic EQ worked (though it's how it's worked on live since 2004 or so).

I just wanna poke in with a question;

Does anyone remember a bunch of triv 15 stuff being essentially no-fail comines? Like making silk threads with tailoring?

[WarpathEQ]

I think you misread the first line because it supports your conclusion.

One thing that was clear for me early in my tradeskill journey is you might as well invest in gear to bring that main stat as close to 255 as you can or you're just making it harder on yourself from a cost perspective.

Sure did, agreed!

[Goregasmic]

That one thing is, whether the combine succeeds or fails, the chance of skill-ing up should be the same. Knowing something like this was huge for live tradeskillers, as you often had stuff you could combine that was above your skill level. If skill-ups depended on success, you really wouldn't want to use those components ... but because it was such useful info, one player did a bunch of combines both ways, and conclusively found that success didn't matter for skillups.

Based on reports I've heard here, it seems skill-ups are more likely with successes, but that's not how classic EQ worked (though it's how it's worked on live since 2004 or so).

Honestly it would make sense because when you're done with wu armor (148?), the most accessible way to skill up is velious armor and the vast majority of that is trivial at 335, meaning until you reach 200ish you have a 5% success rate, meaning your skill up rate is basically the failure skill up rate. This would be harsher than it would need to be but this is also everquest.

I have enough mats banked to make a couple hundred tailoring combines and I plan on farming more so if you have something you want me to gather stats on, I can do it.

[loramin]

I just wanna poke in with a question;

Does anyone remember a bunch of triv 15 stuff being essentially no-fail comines? Like making silk threads with tailoring?

I don't remember any tradeskill combines being truly no-fail; I think there was always a 5% failure rate on even the most trivial combine.

I believe there were no-fail combines, but they were only combines for quests (like the Brewing one for the Tunare Cleric root neck).

Honestly it would make sense because when you're done with wu armor (148?), the most accessible way to skill up is velious armor and the vast majority of that is trivial at 335, meaning until you reach 200ish you have a 5% success rate, meaning your skill up rate is basically the failure skill up rate. This would be harsher than it would need to be but this is also everquest.

I have enough mats banked to make a couple hundred tailoring combines and I plan on farming more so if you have something you want me to gather stats on, I can do it.

Yes exactly.

The really frustrating thing about trying to find proof one way or the other is the misinformation. There were so many wrong ideas about tradeskilling (eg. that holding a tradeskiill book while you combined increased your success rate).

Even the people that tried to be objective did so with relatively small datasets of < 100 combines, and because the RNG was so streaky you couldn't draw proper conclusions from such data.

That's why it kills me that I can't find the one player who did a proper analysis, with hundreds of combines, specifically to answer this question. I know he existed (and based on another post I found, I think he was an Ogre), but his proof of the mechanics seems to have been completely scrubbed from the internet :(

[Jimjam]

I don't remember any tradeskill combines being truly no-fail; I think there was always a 5% failure rate on even the most trivial combine.

I believe there were no-fail combines, but they were only combines for quests (like the Brewing one for the Tunare Cleric root neck).



Yes exactly.

The really frustrating thing about trying to find proof one way or the other is the misinformation. There were so many wrong ideas about tradeskilling (eg. that holding a tradeskiill book while you combined increased your success rate).

Even the people that tried to be objective did so with relatively small datasets of < 100 combines, and because the RNG was so streaky you couldn't draw proper conclusions from such data.

That's why it kills me that I can't find the one player who did a proper analysis, with hundreds of combines, specifically to answer this question. I know he existed (and based on another post I found, I think he was an Ogre), but his proof of the mechanics seems to have been completely scrubbed from the internet :(

Ogre? Evidence scrubbed from the web? Sounds more like a troll! Seriously though, I hope you find your post. I try to keep an eye open when I’m surfing Dolalin’s.

[Duik]

oof. sorry you don't got "sorry you don't got" retort.

Haha Bastard i missed this!