Fair point, but if that's the case, they should have just made it a requirement to use the max amount to upgrade it and not even worry about lower %'s... because obviously, it isn't worth losing the item and reagents to begin with.
So, yes, I understand where you're coming from, but part of this system is redundant and serves no purpose if you're going to practically force people to keep it at 100% to avoid losing anything.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »I think the ability to raise the chance of success up to100% by adding more upgrade components makes it a fair system. There is also the skill to increase the chance of upgrade success, meaning less would be needed to make it 100%. If we were unable to get it to 100% I would agree that losing the equipment woulda been crappy.
Fair point, but if that's the case, they should have just made it a requirement to use the max amount to upgrade it and not even worry about lower %'s... because obviously, it isn't worth losing the item and reagents to begin with.
So, yes, I understand where you're coming from, but part of this system is redundant and serves no purpose if you're going to practically force people to keep it at 100% to avoid losing anything.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »A good compromise, however, would be to make it so the risk of losing the item is gone at certain %'s. say after 60% the chance to lose the item vanishes, meaning you can spend more upgrade mats to first get higher chance, then eliminate risk of loss, then eliminate risk of failure. Maybe something along those lines.
Nothing is more aggravating than trying to purchase expensive reagents and then losing your item and the reagents in the process. The chance of that happening should be way lower than it is, and what should happen a vast majority of the time is you just lose the reagents (like Dwarven Oil). I wouldn't mind if there are still "critical failures" and the item is gone, but it should not happen all the time.
Do you think you're being helpful?
... in addition to it not even being relevant to the discussion.
It's not about what the system does, it's about what could be changed.
Fair point, but if that's the case, they should have just made it a requirement to use the max amount to upgrade it and not even worry about lower %'s.
demonlkojipub19_ESO wrote: »A good compromise, however, would be to make it so the risk of losing the item is gone at certain %'s. say after 60% the chance to lose the item vanishes, meaning you can spend more upgrade mats to first get higher chance, then eliminate risk of loss, then eliminate risk of failure. Maybe something along those lines.
I would be very happy with that compromise. Great idea.
Why, because they disagree with you? You're the funny person here, saying the system needs to change; they're just saying it's perfectly fine the way it is. *shrug*So many funny people on this board that think something simple like this, in the name of fun, will be the death of this game. Get a grip.
I understand the frustration, I have lost a few items...but now I just save up to get the 100%...takes time but seems worth it.
Sure it is:
80% Chance for each try not for all together. So the 6 times you had no luck and the 20% Chance of failure crushed your item
Yes, I'm aware of probability theory.
Using this theory, the chances of getting 6 fails out of 6 trials where the chance per trial is 80% is 1 over 5 to the 6th power, or .000064 out of 1, or .0064%.
Scientifically, the chances are greater that there is some inaccuracy to the 80% quoted chance then there are of me failing 6 trials in a row.
Sure it is:
80% Chance for each try not for all together. So the 6 times you had no luck and the 20% Chance of failure crushed your item
Yes, I'm aware of probability theory.
Using this theory, the chances of getting 6 fails out of 6 trials where the chance per trial is 80% is 1 over 5 to the 6th power, or .000064 out of 1, or .0064%.
Scientifically, the chances are greater that there is some inaccuracy to the 80% quoted chance then there are of me failing 6 trials in a row.
Actually, that is not correct at all.
The chances of every single instances is 80%. At no time does a previous attempt have anything to do with your chances. It is a common mistake, but this is what we refer to as mutually exclusive events.
Math is fun.