English

#51 Added by Fyrosfreddy 8 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

Those links open a lot of doors !

---

#52 Added by Nudge 8 years ago Report | Quote 

#53 Added by Nudge 8 years ago Report | Quote 

#54 Added by Gidget 8 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

Nudge

EDIT: So.... Is there a yubo above Q60, that appears normally?

If "annually" qualifies as "regularly" then there is Yubohoho (q270). Otherwise, q60 is as big as a Yubo gets.

---

Do not assume that you speak for all just because you are the loudest voice; there are many who disagree that simply have no desire to waste words on you.

#55 Added by Placio 8 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

Capryni eye is very close to yubo stats and comes in q110 and 170 :) Aiming for excellent mats is easier than waiting for choice mobs, since excellent mobs respawn every 50 minutes! Check Molly's mats or another db for other stats.

#56 Added by Arcueid 8 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

This is exactly why I love crafting. The best tools are worthless, if you can't make the recipe. It needs alot of experience to create efficient recipes, where efficiency can be for example:

* possible to make in large amounts (for guild or maybe rubbarn attempts)
* using as many easy to aquire materials as possible (for example use many dug mats and only few boss / named mats)
* using materials available all the time (for example dug choice materials + excellent from named)
* using as few material types as possible (to reduce type of mats needed to be dug)
* getting the best stats possible while conserving rare mats (using for example yubo boss mats, which can be aquired once a year)
* creating 2nd class recipes with ALOT less rare materials (replacing a supreme boss with excellent mats, losing only 1-2%)

...and much more! In the end it depends on the crafter to chose a recipe suited for the needs and crafting environment to select from. One can absolutely tell a handcrafted and refined recipe from a generated one. Even if it was generated, many of the parameters have to be set and tweaked in a way it makes sense.

Happy crafting!
arc

---

#57 Added by Nudge 8 years ago Report | Quote 

#58 Added by Arcueid 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

A new beta version is available with the following (small) changes:

* Evolver
  - improved recipe generation with enforced item color
  - added an option to prefer boosted recipes
  - added an option to limit item variety used per part of a recipe
  - fixed a memory leak related to wrong material filters

* Jeweler
  - fixed a memory leak related to wrong material filters

You can get the latest beta here, as usual:

http://www.mollylovescake.de/kcbeta/

arc

---

#59 Added by Moniq 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

Thank you very much!

#60 Added by Fyrosfreddy 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

1. Cool, I have run into that a few times, rare tho.

2. We talkin rubbarm boost or the craft boost

3. Excellent

4. As for the memory leaks, never bothered me ... suffer from same affliction myself.

As for the thread title, is there anything else ya still need confirmed ? Am redoing / checking the tables in Post 25 of the BT thread. Spent last two days confirming duability low range (0% precraft) which ya can see in last post.

Question: To test 0% precraft Molly said best mats for LA were:

Anette / Buo, Glue Resin, Gulatch Oil, Silverweed / Viscous Sap. All have a Durability value of 1, however in KC and IG, Buo gives 1% Precraft and Anete gives 0%

---

#61 Added by Arcueid 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

Thank you FF for your questions. 2. is the stretch / bonus an item gets, not the rubbarn boost.

I investigated your question regarding anete and buo and found an issue with my formulas handling these cases in KipeeCraft. I uploaded a new beta, which should reflect the ingame behaviour even better now.

Buo gets no boost at all, so the raw stats add up which leads to a 1 for durability. Anete however gets maximum boost shifting the 1 durability below 1 and is then floored to 0 for the final preview. The difference is due to the boost applied in one case.

arc


Changes as of 20180128:

* improved precraft accuracy for bordercases between weak boost and no boost to match ingame values (e.g. boost of 1,0023)

Get your copy here http://www.mollylovescake.org/kcbeta/

Last edited by Arcueid (7 years ago)

---

#62 Added by Arcueid 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

The current beta has still some issues left with floating point numbers and accuracy (my eternal nemesis!). I most recently discovered this issue: if you take 99.95, multiply it by 100, convert to integer and divide by 100 again it becomes 100 instead of 99.95!

x = int(x * 100) / 100;

This resulted in some false positives 100% recipes which only end up at 99% ingame. Fortunately the original KipeeCraft (non Beta) is correct. I will work this fix into the next release of the beta version, stay tuned for updates.

arc

---

#63 Added by Jahuu 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

I got no idea what language that is, but could it have some sort of

x = double(x * 100) / 100;

?


Other way could be doing bit operations (shifting, rolling and adding) instead of multiply/divide. That's atleast what we do on 8-bit world ;)

---

#64 Added by Arcueid 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

This was just an example, no real code. It is related to single and double and the fact some numbers can't be stored in those datatypes. I had everything on currency before (could also use integer only and scale everything), but ryzom is internally also using singles and doubles. When I had KC *exact* it spilled out wrong numbers, because the game also has some rounding, cutoff, drift etc.

It is quite a challenge... But a welcome one.

arc

---

#65 Added by Fyrosfreddy 7 years ago Report | Quote 

{translate}

Here' a tirck I uysed for many years in the spreadsheet version of BT Crafting Ranges.  For rounding to dodge parry..lets say with max = 3, min = -1, everyting from -1 to 1.99 = 1, where x = %

 @ Int(X * 4) - 1

So everything from 0.76 to 0.99 was +2

0.74 x 3 = 2.96
Int(3.04) = 2
2 - 1 = 2

0.76 x 3 = 3.04
Int(3.04) = 3
3 - 1 = 2

0.99 x 4 = 3.96
Int(3.96) = 3
3 - 1 = 2

1.00 x 4 = 4.00
Int(4.00) = 4
4 - 1 = 3

I came up w/ the idea due to the limited coding capability of 1973 era Fortran.  I was attempting to write a program to size concrete beams and round the depth up to nearest half inch .. for that I had to double it +1.  had forgotten about it till tried to address Dodge / Parry in spreadsheet calculator.  My son, the SS geek (in finance) siggested a look up table and wrote a 67 character thing which worked ... this was easier :)

---