Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

[Cybertech] why does crafted purples destroy set bonus?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Crew Skills
[Cybertech] why does crafted purples destroy set bonus?

Gyronamics's Avatar


Gyronamics
06.19.2013 , 10:38 AM | #11
Either I'm not understanding you or you're understanding and not liking it.


From the top this is how it was:

Set bonus was on Rakata, Columi or Tionese shells (shells being the moddable item without mods in)

You could swap in and out armourings and the set bonus from the shell would still apply.

The exception was if you put in a Campaign or Dread Guard set bonus armouring, that would take effect instead.



This is how it is:

All set bonuses on shells were deleted. Any set bonus on a shell was moved to whatever armouring was installed at the time.

Removing the armouring with the set bonus does what it says. The shell has no bonus so you now have no bonus.

Overwriting a set bonus armouring with a blank armouring deletes the set bonus armouring AND the set bonus which was on it.


So in a nutshell if you stay out of top raids you will not be able to upgrade armouring with set bonuses.

If you upgrade with crafted armourings you will always be 1 tier below a raiders armouring and still have no set bonus.
Hotwired @ Not Good Enough @ ToFN

L-RANDLE's Avatar


L-RANDLE
06.19.2013 , 11:53 AM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Gyronamics View Post
Either I'm not understanding you or you're understanding and not liking it.


From the top this is how it was:

Set bonus was on Rakata, Columi or Tionese shells (shells being the moddable item without mods in)

You could swap in and out armourings and the set bonus from the shell would still apply.

The exception was if you put in a Campaign or Dread Guard set bonus armouring, that would take effect instead.



This is how it is:

All set bonuses on shells were deleted. Any set bonus on a shell was moved to whatever armouring was installed at the time.

Removing the armouring with the set bonus does what it says. The shell has no bonus so you now have no bonus.

Overwriting a set bonus armouring with a blank armouring deletes the set bonus armouring AND the set bonus which was on it.


So in a nutshell if you stay out of top raids you will not be able to upgrade armouring with set bonuses.

If you upgrade with crafted armourings you will always be 1 tier below a raiders armouring and still have no set bonus.
You could use *crafted Camp/BH in those shells and not lose set bonus. Which means I didn't need to raid to get them. So no... I had the same 63 as raiders did without losing and set bonus...
PvP Gear Viability? Read this first.
Tired of being broke? Stop being Felica and read this.
I'm not trying to be Rambo..... I'm trying to be Ray Tango

Khevar's Avatar


Khevar
06.19.2013 , 12:44 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by L-RANDLE View Post
You could use *crafted Camp/BH in those shells and not lose set bonus. Which means I didn't need to raid to get them. So no... I had the same 63 as raiders did without losing and set bonus...
The change was made to encourage raiding.

Now, as I said earlier, you either already like raiding or you already don't like it. If you like it, keep going -- you'll keep your set bonus on the next tier. If you don't, then 21 out of 25 pieces of your gear (including the Main Hand and Offhand) can be Underworld-level gear and still keep your set bonus.

Unless you're a tank, and you need the extra armor rating for mitigation, all you're giving up is 64 points of main stat. That's the equivalent of 2 augments or 1/4 of a stim. I.e. Not a Big Deal At All.

SlimsPicken's Avatar


SlimsPicken
06.19.2013 , 12:48 PM | #14
Yeah i am very unhappy with them ruining my old tionese/columni/rakata shells i worked for and have absolutely no wish to raid for again.

I was quite dismayed when 2.0 arrived and all my set bonuses went poof the second i slotted my new crafted armorings.

Yet another unnecessary "fix" of something that wasnt broken for no good reason.
For every man there is a sentence, a string of words, which has the power to destroy him.

L-RANDLE's Avatar


L-RANDLE
06.19.2013 , 01:11 PM | #15
Quote: Originally Posted by Khevar View Post
The change was made to encourage raiding.

Now, as I said earlier, you either already like raiding or you already don't like it. If you like it, keep going -- you'll keep your set bonus on the next tier. If you don't, then 21 out of 25 pieces of your gear (including the Main Hand and Offhand) can be Underworld-level gear and still keep your set bonus.

Unless you're a tank, and you need the extra armor rating for mitigation, all you're giving up is 64 points of main stat. That's the equivalent of 2 augments or 1/4 of a stim. I.e. Not a Big Deal At All.
Ok let's just assume I wanted to raid..... Do you feel I should give up my set bonus to go on said raid? I mean if my guild is running NiM Ops, do I choose gear upgrade or set bonus.. That's the problem. You shouldnt have to sacrifice your set bonus in order to upgrade your gear otherwise its not really an upgrade....

See my point?
I ran FP/Dailies to get my shells. I made crafted armoring to keep them. Now, I am stuck raiding if I want to keep my set bonus and upgrade my gear.... I don't need encouragement to raid, and it is now having the opposite affect..
PvP Gear Viability? Read this first.
Tired of being broke? Stop being Felica and read this.
I'm not trying to be Rambo..... I'm trying to be Ray Tango

Khevar's Avatar


Khevar
06.19.2013 , 02:29 PM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by L-RANDLE View Post
Ok let's just assume I wanted to raid..... Do you feel I should give up my set bonus to go on said raid? I mean if my guild is running NiM Ops, do I choose gear upgrade or set bonus.. That's the problem. You shouldnt have to sacrifice your set bonus in order to upgrade your gear otherwise its not really an upgrade....

See my point?
I ran FP/Dailies to get my shells. I made crafted armoring to keep them. Now, I am stuck raiding if I want to keep my set bonus and upgrade my gear.... I don't need encouragement to raid, and it is now having the opposite affect..
You don't have to give up your set bonus to go on raids. Just keep your armorings that already have the set bonus.

The difference between 63 armorings and 72 armorings is 16 points of main stat, which isn't very much. You're not hurting your ability to raid with the lower-level armorings.

I know this because I prefer the old Commando 4-piece set bonus, so I went into NM TfB and cleared the first boss wearing mostly 72 gear with the exception of 4 pieces of DG armoring.

So if this is good enough for NM The Writhing Horror, you can rest assured it's plenty good enough for every other raid in the game.

anwg's Avatar


anwg
06.19.2013 , 03:09 PM | #17
I think it's to prevent using pve armoring with pvp armor, or vice versa. Or prevent you using tionese shells and just buy high level armoring and have raid gear without raiding.

But yeah, it kinda screws cybertech.

L-RANDLE's Avatar


L-RANDLE
06.19.2013 , 04:25 PM | #18
Quote: Originally Posted by Khevar View Post
You don't have to give up your set bonus to go on raids. Just keep your armorings that already have the set bonus.

The difference between 63 armorings and 72 armorings is 16 points of main stat, which isn't very much. You're not hurting your ability to raid with the lower-level armorings.

I know this because I prefer the old Commando 4-piece set bonus, so I went into NM TfB and cleared the first boss wearing mostly 72 gear with the exception of 4 pieces of DG armoring.

So if this is good enough for NM The Writhing Horror, you can rest assured it's plenty good enough for every other raid in the game.
16 main? Less end, less crit rating, less armor rating. Good enough is not the point anyway... I should not even have to choose in a scenario where I am upgrading my gear via crafting. Then add in the fact that my cybertech has useless endgame items, further deepens my disstain for this move. It didn't need to be made and alienated vets that did the endgame activities to obtain them.

I don't know about your guild, but mine will probably not want to see lvl 63 anything in one of the new NiM Ops. If I were returning, it would be stupid that I would need to do the same ops over again to get the set bonus, if I want to upgrade my gear.
[Edit]....
PvP Gear Viability? Read this first.
Tired of being broke? Stop being Felica and read this.
I'm not trying to be Rambo..... I'm trying to be Ray Tango

Khevar's Avatar


Khevar
06.19.2013 , 04:28 PM | #19
Quote: Originally Posted by anwg View Post
...

But yeah, it kinda screws cybertech.
Remember, even leaving the set bonus alone there are still 3 slots that can be filled with crafted armoring, and for any non-dual-wielding class, the offhand slot. Actually, an offhand armoring will give you a considerable damage or healing boost, as it directly tech/force power by a large margin.

Also, have you seen the endurance-heavy mods in the Verpine gear? Ugh. Unlettered-mods-cybertech-for-the-win.

Cybertech may not be the endgame-dominating crafting profession it was before 2.0 dropped, but it's hardly screwed.

Khevar's Avatar


Khevar
06.19.2013 , 04:32 PM | #20
Quote: Originally Posted by L-RANDLE View Post
...

I don't know about your guild, but mine will probably not want to see lvl 63 anything in one of the new NiM Ops. If I were returning, it would be stupid that I would need to do the same ops over again to get the set bonus, if I want to upgrade my gear.
I get that it's the principle of the thing that bothers you, but if you did decide to get back into end-game raiding, you're not going to be able to go into NM TfB cold anyway. There are a lot of punishing mechanics to learn, and SM and/or HM would be the way to bridge that gap.

If you were decked out in full crafted 72 gear, less 4 pieces of DG armoring, there isn't a single HM Operation in the game you'd be undergeared for. While practing HM TfB and HM S&V, you would then get Underworld drops and fill in your missing high-end armoring, keeping your set bonus.

It seems a simple enough solution to me.