Architect Archive

I know that there are many issues with architects (furniture, cost, factories not working correctly, houses bugged, etc...), but the #1 is that everything an architect makes does not deteriorate and can be redeeded. Look at Weapons/Armor/Food etc...all of their itemsare used up over time. But a house, harvester,factoryor furniturelast forever. The market will dry up very fast, I knowquite a few of my customers tell me they have everything they need forever already (large house, heavy harvesters, factories and furniture)

I feel re-deeding is the problem. If you buy a house, harvester or factory and want to move it you should get credits back. You shouldn't get the deed back.

IMHO they should make it so that you get back .5-.8 credits per resourced used to make the deed.

If this was implemented then the large amount of architects could stay in business. If not in a couple months, there only needs to be a few PA architects per server.

I am a solo player that has made some business deals. I can make 1 PA hall, 1 large house and a heavy harvester a day (this doesn't count the people that come to me and ask me to make a PA Hall and have all the resources). PA architects can make much more, so imagine how fast the market will dry up.

Zorph

After thinking about this and talking with a friend, maybe they should do the following:

1. When you destroy the unit you should get the maintanence fees and power back

2. Here is what I would suggest you get back in credits if you destroy the home/harvester/factory

Small Houses/Harvesters should be .7 per

Medium 1.0 per

Large/Heavy 1.2 per

I will list the lowest prices I have seen on Bloodfin

Returned Lowest Sell Price Cost to Move

Small Houses 23503k 650

Personal Harvesters175 500 325

Med Harvester 36007k 3400

Med Houses23600 35k 11400

MedHarvester3607 7k 3393

Large House 42618 80k28858

Heavy Harvester 2770070k 36760

My guess is that harvester prices would have to go down to be worth it. My guess is the price of harvesters would go down. In particular heavy harvesters.

I have a major, major problem with your suggestion unless architects themselves are exempt/immune from deed deterioration or altogether disappearance in your suggestion. I like architect just fine as it is, but if we who have the ability to create and build these things to begin with couldn't reclaim a deed perfectly intact, then there's no way I'd go for such a suggestion. I do hope that's a part of such a change if such a change does eventually become implemented.

Architects shouldn't be able to redeed something in mint condition when the rest of the game can't. The advantages an architect has is that they can rebuild the structure for far less than another player in the game can rebuild a structure for. Thats the advantage right there. Say a medium harvester needs to be destroyed and replaced, it will cost the architect far less than it would cost any other player in the game that needs to buy one from an architect. There is no need to make it so that an architect can reclaim property cost free when they already have a built in advantage in rebuilding the structure.

As a resource supplier to Architects... I'd suggest you guys put on your boots andprepare to supply yourself with the 1000's of resources you need. If you expect me to lose my equipment with each resource switch (1 per week at least) then I'm going to charge you so much money for my resource your nose will bleed.

And that's a fact.

Branix - Naboo - Resource Supplier

The other idea is that each time you move a harvester it less effective. We just can't expect to be able to make architect items for a long time if they never deteriate.

---

killbuckner wrote:
Architects shouldn't be able to redeed something in mint condition when the rest of the game can't. The advantages an architect has is that they can rebuild the structure for far less than another player in the game can rebuild a structure for. Thats the advantage right there. Say a medium harvester needs to be destroyed and replaced, it will cost the architect far less than it would cost any other player in the game that needs to buy one from an architect. There is no need to make it so that an architect can reclaim property cost free when they already have a built in advantage in rebuilding the structure.

---

Do wha..? Since when do players other than architects get structures at less than 100% when re-deployed elsewhere after reclaiming a deed? If that's occurring it's the first I've heard of it from anyone. We don't currently get any more or less of an advantage than anyone else does in terms of reclamining a deed and re-deploying the structure elsewhere...it's the same for everyone so far as I'm aware. If that's not correct, someone please tell me because this is the first I've heard of it anyway.

What I was addressing was the hypothetical situation of *if* they implement a system whereby structures deteriorate when reclaiming the deed....and if they do, then I 100% wholeheartedly disagree with you...architects *should* be able to do so without pentalty when the rest of the game can't. If you want that ability, then become an architect. That's the whole point of choosing a profession is having the ability to do something others can't. Droid Engineers can build probots...I can't. CH's can tame high level creatures and use them in combat...I can't. Medics and Doctors can heal stat point and wounds at the tap of a button once they've made their medpacks....I can't. If I wanted the ability to do any of those things, then I should start working towards learning those professions instead of Architect. Every profession has it's unique abilities and such that they can do that the rest of the game can't. There's nothing unfair about that at all. What would be unfair is making architects suffer the penalties when we're the ones thatproduce thesestructures and installations to begin with. If I can build it, then most certainly Ihave the skill to unbuild it and build it again. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.

Not looking at the game right now, but aren't there 2 gauges when operating a harvester? one is for the input, is the other for effectiveness? Does that gauge stay at 100% all the time? If thats the case then I am guessing there is code in place do to what we are talking about. That as the effectiveness drops, your overall intake drops below what you would get with a new harvester. Perhaps there was some bug that prevented them from turning this feature on from the start? But I agree- unless something gets done fast it will be absolutely pointless to be an architect. This is the number 1, 2, and 3 issue because without structures deteriorating to the point of needing to be replaced there will be no architect profession at all after some point.

I am taking about the hypothetical situation too. IF structures deteriorate when you redeed them, then all player should play by the same rules. Architects get a big enough advantage because they can rebuild a structure for just the cost of the resources. They don't have to pay anyone else to do that for them. Thats a huge advantage, especially once the quality of the products varies with the materials and skill of the architect. It would be like making it so that if you use a probot it can be permadeathed, but if a DE uses a probot in battle then the thing is immortal. No... if the droid dies when a DE uses it then his advantage is that he can replace it for the cost of the materials. Being able to make something out of nothing but a stack of resources is a HUGE advantage to begin with. You don't need more advantages on top of that.

Are you talking about the KGH gauges under Operate Machinery? If so, the number in the second one represents the max the harvester can run at/produce...the first shows you the actual amount you're pulling. And it only changes in direct correllation to the richness concentration you place it on for the resource you're harvesting. That's the way I've always understood it to be anyway....hypothetically, if you found a 100% richness concentration spot and placed a personal harvester on it, you would get 2.00 out of 2.00. On a 50% spot, you'd get 1.00 out of 2.00...so on and so forth. I'm not aware of reclaming the deed and redeploying it changing anything, efficiency or otherwise, for architects or anyone else along these lines....again, if any of the above is wrong, someone please feel free to correct me, but I've never been aware of it, either in beta or the live game.

Right. The 2nd gauge represents the max that a harvester can produce, but that can easily be thought of as a percentage. What I would want to see is that if you are on a 100% vein, a brand new harvester would get the 2kg/hr. One that had been moved 3 times already would not have 100% on the "max" gauge, but it would be at say 80%. So then on that same 100% vein you would only be pulling 1.6 kg/hr on that same 100% density vein. If both harvesters were on an 80% vein, the brand new harvester would be getting 1.6 Kg/hr while the one that had been moved 3 times would only be getting 1.2 Kg/hr. Always 20% less. The more times you move a harvester the less it will collect compared to a brand new one. Maybe there would be temporary fixes that would get the "max" percentage up for a short period of time.

This is all hypothetical, its just how I would want to see it work.

The way to fix thisI thing is that depending on how complex something is there is a max durabilty which could then carry over as totaly numbers of how may time you can redeed some thing...like lets say a max durability for the hardest to make is a PA hall lets say you get a max durability of only redeeding in 1 time and for easiest of items like small houses 4 times..so those with lower experimentation will have lower durabily results hense make things with less redeed uses. This would allow those starting out to still compete with those who have been playing since day one.

The one exceptionI think would be harvestors..considering the use and cost to make....I say give them double or triple the uses considering rescorces shift quite often ..would be unfair to those who cannot make there own.

Roate A'fey (Gothar)

---

killbuckner wrote:
I am taking about the hypothetical situation too. IF structures deteriorate when you redeed them, then all player should play by the same rules. Architects get a big enough advantage because they can rebuild a structure for just the cost of the resources. They don't have to pay anyone else to do that for them. Thats a huge advantage, especially once the quality of the products varies with the materials and skill of the architect. It would be like making it so that if you use a probot it can be permadeathed, but if a DE uses a probot in battle then the thing is immortal. No... if the droid dies when a DE uses it then his advantage is that he can replace it for the cost of the materials. Being able to make something out of nothing but a stack of resources is a HUGE advantage to begin with. You don't need more advantages on top of that.

---

You're making a completely apples-to-oranges comparison here. Structures and installations aren't mobile units that engage in combat. And even if it did make any sense at all to try and make a parallel comparison between your scenario and what we're talking about here, using the same logic, a DE would have the skill to repair a destroyed droid or at least salvage some of the parts. Emphasis here is on destroyed of course. The only way structures become destroyed or 'permadeathed' as it were is if you didn't maintain the structure at 100% to begin with, which is an automatic given in the discussion here and a completely moot point.

I also take issue with your blanket simplistic statement that "Architects get a big enough advantage because they can rebuild a structure for just the cost of the resources." How is that an advantage?!Of COURSE we can build and rebuild structures for the cost of the resources....that's the whole point, which I addressed before. It's what we do, it's what defines our profession in the first place. "Everyone else in the game" has the advantage to not have to spend the money and the time and effort to go running all over creation feeding harvesters and seeking out resource richness concentrations and going through the hassle of actually moving all those harvesters everytime resources shift and so on and so forth. No offense, but you're completely off base to suggest that having the ability to do what we already do in the first place in terms of being able to build a structure is suddenly an unfair advantage when it comes to simply throwing the gears into reverse to move something. Architects have the skill to do it, others don't. That's not an unfair advantage, that's merely a natural and logical no-brainer as part of learning the profession to begin with. Sheesh.