-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 157
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Standard Solver Concern #69
Comments
If it's skipping GS/Byregots, it tells me your cutting it really fine with your CP since there's 2 conditions for the solver to use these.
This second one is likely where your problem lies, since if the action would be Master's Mend, it has to use that or you'll fail, so if repairing takes you under BB CP range, it's unfortunately skipped. |
Solver seems like its forcing itself into situation #2 and in some cases never using BB. Rarely see it completing situation #1, appears to be aiming to use BB alone almost always (at least in simulations I checked). I'm surprised it would come up with solutions that are as inconsistent as I'd seen though in actual use. For example I'd seen it use GS/BB in one synthesis, then the next just BB, then the next neither. It even would basic touch over BB with enough CP available to use and finish. Gear wise I would not expect to have issues, as they're fairly easy to top quality with a static macro. Typically getting full quality even before GS/BB. |
It's not really "forcing" itself into situation 2, that's just the way the craft might end up with the resources it has left. Standard crafts will only use one BB, so it tries to get as much value out of it as possible so will put it off until it's able to finish the quality or the next action would normally run out of CP for it. This isn't a problem until you land in an awkward position where the next action has to be Master's Mend but using that will put you under the CP for BB. The solution to this is not going to be an easy one since it will require more foresight from the solver beyond just the current step. It would really have to assess the current step and assume the next one, and if that one is a mend step just BB and finish the craft instead. Not sure how long it will take me to logic this out but I have been aware it's a flaw of the solver currently. |
Noticed the standard solver is incredibly worse than a prebuilt macro, it's even skipping usage of great strides/byregots in some cases. Is this standard behavior or is there an issue?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: