Quote Originally Posted by Deno View Post
I don't really understand how you see demonssword's suggestion as being complicated as it seems very simple to me and I'm sure several other people reading this thread. The reason he suggested it was because apparantly randomisation upon research is IMPOSSIBLE given the current game mechanics. If someone can confirm/deny this that would be much appreciated. Of course randomisation upon research would be the simplest solution, but the point is it might not be so simple for the devs to implement... (the mechanic whereby an NPC swaps an item in your inventory for another one is however possible I believe)

As for which rareparts should be in the pool or not, I think it would ultimately be shortsighted to remove certain classes/specific weapons. What happens when they balance it and suddenly melee weapons are viable again? (also on a related note, subpar=useless when it comes to PvP, hence why you might as well sell your rare melee parts to Yo's).
I cant remember where i saw them say it or of course i might have dreamt it (yeah i have boring dreams :P). But im sure i remember them saying it before back in the 2.0 days that the mechanic didnt excist for them being able to do this.
The other advantage to my solution over the current system (though it is shared with the randomise on research method) is that currently there seems to be a few parts that are extremely rare such as ATP of CS, and any form of randomisation from source should mean IF they want all parts to be as rare as each other then it would be easy to sort. They have said before that no part should be rarer than any other, but upon seeing evidence they admitted that something looked wrong and many speculated that it was doing to certain mobs dropping certain rares.

Anyway either system is fine, i just think mine might be easier to implement than randomising on research if they have to make a vast change in the way the processor works.
HOWEVER as someone did point out to me, random stuff on research could happen in the processor as proved by slotted items on constructing. So my example of A+B+C=D, means that actually A+B+C=D (0 slot), E (1 slot), F (2 slot), G (3 slot), H (4 slot) or I (5 slot) with varible results of 30%/30%/20%/10%/5%/5% for D-E-F-G-H-I or whatever the stats are.