Please add smaller repair kits as an option

I would humbly ask for some more granularity to repairs, for example in the form of Small repair kits.

With the R22 changes regarding repairs, I was expecting to finally be able to make smaller repairs. I want to keep my armor/weapons in top condition at all times, but what the current generic repair kit implementation implicitly states is roughly as follows:

"Sorry, you can't do small repairs. Of course in principle you can, but it will be insanely expensive. What you need to do instead, is to bring your gear to a semi-broken state, and then you can fix it economically with the Mega-Fix repair kit."​

So when the crafting station repairs came into the game, I was expecting the specialized repair kits to provide more of the long-needed granularity, for example ability to repair just 10 points of damage (this is how real armor and weapons would be maintained if one actually cares about them). However when the R22 arrived, the added message was just:

"And oh, by the way, we just upped the crafting cost of the megakit, so as an example for any blacksmithing repair you now need three ingots instead of two."​

Note, I don't mind the increased material cost per se (I'm fully aware it's all a matter of balancing), but I do mind the ever-increasing cost of small repairs.

So if you want to keep the concept of a "repair kit" associated also to the crafting station repairs, please be so kind and add a smaller repair kit. Implementation-wise, it's just one additional recipe per specialization.

For instance, for blacksmithing, 1 ingot and 1 leather could make a Small Repair Kit that is able to repair 10 durability instead of 40. Or alternatively 4 ingots and 3 leather could make 4 smaller kits. It would still be more economical to repair major damage with the bigger kits.

 

I don't know about this.

I don't see the point in constantly doing small repairs to things.

 

If you do not see the point, I can't see why would you be against adding it as an option? As I said, it is an additional recipe -- if you don't like it, don't use it.

 

If i don't like it - i argue against it so it doesnt get implemented in the first Place and devs can work on other things. That's what these forums are for

But sure, i´ll bite.

We already have mobile repair kits ( which i am against in the first Place, you should repair thru blacksmiths / Crafting stations )
There is no need to add a smaller repair kit that is easier to make so that people constantly can be at full durability.

There need to be a drawback to repairing in the fields, and currently that is a cost. Perfect compromise

 

I don't mind how things currently are. Though I do feel that if your doing the repair at a blacksmith table you should get 90-100% repair from 1 kit. I seems silly have to use 2+ kits sometimes(at a table), to get an item with 100 durability fully repaired.

 

I do not see this concerning dev opportunity costs that much. The devs have stated very clearly that they've laid groundwork for a crafting system that makes it very easy to add recipes. In this case it's about making a copy of the specialized repair kit and adjusting the parameters. So I believe it's mostly a matter of balance and preference, not effort.

Would you please quote my exact words where I'm proposing to "add a smaller repair kit that is easier to make"?

My post was mostly about repair kits that are used at crafting stations. Actually that was the whole point and motivation of my post.

Personally I don't care about mobile repair kits either. Should they exist at all, they should be more expensive (maybe 2-3x more expensive per damage repaired) and repair only smallish amount of damage (and this is what the "max durability" tries to achieve). But I digress.

As I said, if the devs want to keep the "repair kit" concept (and I assume they do), then the cost of using a smaller kit would be higher cost per durability point repaired (in my blacksmithing example just the "ingot cost" would be 33% higher than with larger kits).

So, if I understand this correctly, what you're saying means that (I'll take blacksmithing as an example) if you're at a blacksmithing station, and want to repair minor damage it costs 3 ingots, the same as repairing major damage, and that is perfectly fine in your opinion? And as a logical corollary, people should be forced to wait until their gear is in a semi-broken state until they get around to repairing them?

 

@helm Good post!

1) In regards to my "easier to make " remark. a smaller kit would have fewer matierials requred, which makes it easier.
Fewer materials = Easier to make = greater chance for critical success = More out of the single Craft. So that is a valid concern of mine.

2) No, i don't see a single problem with a repair being a high cost for smaller repairs. each small repair would decrease the overall durability of the item, and that is a reason to do as few repairs as possible.

Each small repair will decrease the items durability with X , while a LARGE repair decrease the items durability ALSO with X ( The same amount ) .

So - Again - What is the reason to do alot of small repairs?

 

Does it matter, in terms of effectiveness, whether an item is at 100% or 3%?

 

Not at the moment, no

 

yeah this just doesn't make sense at all, thy don't repair a lot out in the field anyhow. If the cost of the resources is an issue WAIT till you have to train your skills, as you train so you can live and fight long enough to hurt your armor the items you need, Leather / Ingots can be easily gatherd.

just doesn't make much sense, sorry if oyu don't like a counterpoint but?

 

So would we like if a weapon was more effective with high durability?

Let say weapon damage scaled with square root of durability or even cubic root

Durability square cubic
100% 100% 100%
80% 89% 93%
60% 77% 84%
40% 63% 73%
20% 45% 58%
10% 31% 46%
5% 22% 36%
1% 10% 21%

Depending on repair cost i think i would repair when damage was 80% or less of max

 

I'd like to see larger repair kits. Fixing up an item for 30 / 40 points is frustrating. Would pay may for a kit that fixes 80 / 100 points (especially if future items have more damage points).

 

@Arradin, could you (or someone) please help me finding a reference to this? I assume that your information is from some developer, is that correct? Is there a link to this statement/comment/reply or something?

 

I know for a fact that it was discussed that they COULD change effectiveness based on damage, and never heard anything about it again.
So i am *assuming* that it doesnt effective the item ( yet )

No statement or link or quote to give you, though.

 

I like when a discussion that had potential to make people angry at each other turns around to constructive. Well played everyone and please keep up the constructive debates.

 

smaller repair kits sounds good because repair kits are so expensive! I basically spend all the gold I have repairing myself. Im not the L33T haXxor gamer type, so I dont go around trying to find funny exploits to make tons of cash in video games that defy the roleplaying experience. I kill mobs, skin em, sell stuff, then run out of gold repairing my gear. Life's hard for a serf tryin to be a warrior...

 

Thank you, I tested it and it seems that you were quite correct.

I put details are inside the spoiler to avoid visual clutter, but the end result seems to be that (at the moment) there is no discernible difference between a (100/100) weapon and a (15/100) weapon that are otherwise identical.

Spoiler: test results

Here's how I tested:
I went to South Ravenswood graveyard with two ordinary longbows (one 100/100 durability and one 20/100) and about 1000 arrows (bows because it's easier to control the number of attacks), I equipped the bows only after entering the graveyard and shot away with both bows (about 500 each) using just auto attack and nothing else, trying to stand still (I made a deck filled with defensive and healing glyphs so I could stay alive during shooting with only the relatively weak auto attack). Before switching to each bow I backed up and reset the chat log for further analysis.

I only paid attention to Large Skeleton Archers (most of the skeletons in that graveyard are those), because Skeleton Mages are able to attack from a larger distance, this may make results related to them unreliable. Skeleton Archers very reliably pick a certain more or less fixed distance if you let them.

So here are the results (the totals differ a bit because every now and then one has to fight a few skeleton mages too)

• Shooting Large Skeleton Archers with a 15/100 bow: total:445 hits:293 misses:152 (hit percentage 65% average dmg 13.63)
• Shooting Large Skeleton Archers with a 100/100 bow: total:474 hits:335 misses:139 (hit percentage 70% average dmg 14.10)

The hit percentage and average damage are a bit better with the 100/100 bow, but this is very likely due to the fact that some of my ranged skills got upgraded during the fight, and I started with the 15/100 bow -- I originally intended to start with the 100/100 bow, but I had to switch to a polearm at some point when entering due to Elder Wolf attack, and the game switched to the 15/100 bow when I switched back to my bow testing deck. I might repeat the test starting with the 100/100 bow to avoid any doubt, but in any case the damage difference is only about 3% -- which is well explainable by just the skill advancement (or even by pure chance).

I'll answer your "what is the reason" question sometime tomorrow, now it's getting a bit late..

 

I did begin to write how i felt about the various ideas, but it got a bit lengthy and i thought "hey i could probably just write my ideal system in as many words" So here it is

In normal use (wear and tear) items would lose only the first number - their Durability
The second number, the Maximum Durability goes down when someone performs Field Repairs

The General Field Repair Kit.
This would be a relatively easy recipe to craft and gather materials for.
It would be used by the players when out in the field, or deep down some dungeon.
In RP terms it would be like taking a whestone to a nicked and scratched blade, or, wiring up a broken buckle, or restitching a strap on some armour while you rested after a battle.
In actual terms it would repair (?) - (?) Durability, and the item would lose (?) Maxmimum Durability

The Specialist Repair Kit.
Exactly how it would be specialist is up for debate i guess, whether its by Craftskill, or by Item Type (light/heavy armour, blades/poles/bludgeon/bow), i prefer by craftskill.
This item is used to repair all the harm we have done our weapons by repairing them after 9 mugs of ale, the Maximum Durability
This should require certain skill level to be successful (20? 40?), the higher your skill the more it repairs (perhaps Grandmasters 100+ fully repair?)
In RP terms this is giving your item to a master-crafter who will treat it with the respect that only a skilled craftsman can give it, and undoing as many of those hasty repairs youve made as he is able, until it is restored as good as new
In actual terms, the crafter (or their vendor) sells you the kit, you apply it to your item and its good as new

Optional - Perhaps not quite "as good as new"
As a crafter, i feel having items that never ever wear out detrimental to my new item sales
Perhaps the Specialist Kits always knock 1 point off of the Max Durability, until eventually the adventurer decides to replace it with a new one

Reforging, (or did i dream it?)
As i was reading over what ive written, the word "reforging" attacked my hindbrain
Im not entirely sure what it is, if it even exists, but i think Richard was saying something about having reforging in SotA
Ive not played a game that had something called Reforging so i dont exactly know what this is, but it sounds like it might be just the thing needed to fully restore an item that had lost max durabilty from my optional section
As long as the crafter stands to earn as much from this as they might earn from selling his still unsold brand new wares
I think that was more about restoring a cherished possession, like an item with Lord British's makers mark on it, but as i say, im not even sure that i didnt just dream this whole thing one day

Final note, ive suggested it all being done with kits, i would prefer it if we went back to the days when you gave it to a crafter, he repaired it and gave it back, and you paid him but i think times have changed and this would lead to scamming, and thats a little sad
Also ive mentioned no hard numbers because after all that sort of thing must be balanced by the devs anyway


Well, thats my idea, or rather a lot of other peoples ideas woven together, but i do think the field repairs tie into what the OP wanted as in caring for his equipment more frequently (like before you logout for the night)

And yes... it was this long before i rewrote it, it just made a lot less sense before, thanks for reading

 

Great point. I vote 'no' to smaller repair kits based on that.

 

I'll first briefly comment on these two points:

You're right in that it's certainly a valid concern. However I think it is just a matter of balancing. I think no-one here has even suggested that smaller kits would have fewer materials required. I know I haven't. If you think otherwise, please quote.

But as far as I'm concerned, repairs do not decrease any durability. I know I said it before but let's say it again as there seems to be some general confusion about the issue. The max figure just says "up to this level you can still repair this item's actual (current) durability on the field". And I think the (Current/Max) system is working pretty well overall, I mean it's good in terms of roleplay, it's good in terms of balance, and good in terms of actual implementability. Just needs a little more balancing.

And now to your big question:

Good question!

I think there are two main types of reasons, reasons related to weapon/armor efficiency and reasons related to roleplay. I'll expand on both of them below. These are partially interlinked, for example if efficiency related issues are glaring enough to be immersion breaking, then that will certainly affect roleplaying as well.
(please NOTE -- below I discuss mostly weapons for the sake of readability, but most of it applies to armor as well)

1. Reasons related to weapon/armor efficiency: if the weapon durability affects its performance, then there is an incentive to keep your weapons in good condition. This is just common sense. All this type is reasoning is (of course) based on the assumption that there is, or will be, or at the very least should be, some game mechanics in place that ties weapon current durability to its efficiency (something like outlined by @Curt in the above post). As you have stated (and as verified by my little test), this functionality is not yet in place. However there are quite a few reasons to believe that it will be implemented, just to name a couple of most obvious ones:
   1. General realism and believability (this is, of course, also roleplay and immersion related). Soo, am I really supposed to believe that this wretched long bow I just wrested from the cold bony hands of a skeleton archer is going to perform just as well as the one I just purchased brand new from my favorite weaponsmith? Really? Huh?
      
   2. Incentives to repair instead of scrap+remake. Roleplaying reasons aside, I think there should be an incentive to actually repair your weapons/armor. In the current system, this is just not the case, especially with lower level gear. In fact it can be much more economical (materials-wise) to just make an item, bring its durability to zero, scrap it, and remake it. Rinse and repeat. No repair kits required. For example, to make a copper halberd (which I might well use if I were a lower level character and couldn't afford anything else), I need enough copper to make two repair kits, and a trivial amount of wood. So if my 9/19 halberd is going to perform just as well as my 95/98 one, why not just use it like a consumable? (As I said, roleplaying reasons aside..) When it breaks, grab a new one from my backpack and start using that. Back at home, scrap the broken one and make a new spare, actually requiring less metal than two crafted blacksmithing repair kits (when one takes the metal scrap obtained from the broken one into account). So the current system incentivizes using up weapons until they break (like a consumable) and then scrapping them. The same applies to all lower lever gear, including most armor. There needs to be an incentive to repair your gear instead, and the obvious way to to do it is to make it so that there's an incentive against using half-broken gear.
2. Roleplay related reasons: These are, of course, individual and therefore quite varied. I can only state my own case as an example, I'm pretty sure there are others. My own character in the game is quite pedantic and likes to keep her gear in decent condition at all times. My character is also a decent blacksmith. So when returning home, I do a maintenance check on the armor and weapons. If I see damage, I like to repair it on the spot, apply oil to prevent rusting, stuff like that. This is how gear is kept in good condition in real life as well -- consistent periodic maintenance. It's NOT min/maxing your stats, it's just what is generally done if you actually care about your gear. Now, the current system prevents me from doing that. Instead I'm encouraged by the game mechanics to treat my gear like a consumable. It's very immersion breaking.

EDIT -- fixed a typo (bronze -> copper) + some clarifications + a couple of emphasis related edits (no change in content) + added the word "realism" to the 1.1. section