Architect Archive
Thread: Why I agree with the Crit Failures.
Although it is very frustrating at times I have to agree that it should saty in place. This is the one thing that can save our economy from new arcitects selling things at cost to maitain thier Harvestors. Once one of them Crit Fails on a Large house or Harvestor they will have to re-think thier prices.
It would also help if they toned down the harvestors to produce LESS, consume more energy, and cost more without experiment. Why? Same reason would fix our economy a whole lot, but if they did that experiment would have to actually do something.
One more thing then ill stop my little post, how many of you are selling Large and Medium Harvestors? This is really killing the CPR ratio alot, think about it even if you sell one for 80k they will remake that in a day or 2 just selling the resources back to US. I have stopped selling any harvestor above regular, with the exception of Solar Genrator. Will the CPR go up if we do that? Possibly for a week or two, but only those who really want to dedicate thier time to JUST producing resources will be the only ones who will keep it up.
Yep there is just no money in arch .. i made master to make our pa hall but i'm likely switching over to Master Miner today and halting all production its just not worth the time. I can always find someone to buy my resources at 3cr/unit with no crit failures and no whining and very little work.
Aydyn -- Master Miner
killbuckner wrote:
None of your solutions would affect the problem you are trying to solve. You want to fix the problem of houses going for dirt cheap prices then make it so that you use lousy resources with no experimentation then you put out a lousy house no one wants. Because experimentation doesn't do much right now, a player has little reason to buy a small house from a novice architect or a master architect except for price. You make the quality of the products vary greatly then you will have a reason to compete on things other than price.
wasnt that my 2nd point, as well as making the quality of the finished product WORSE than what it is now if you DONT experiment?
those things were not to be taken seperatly, combined they would work.
To sell at cost you would make junk, quality harvestorsactually costing moneywould mean less people mining ( not all ), also with quality harvestors they would produce more, so we wouldnt have to rely on buying resources. Not relying on buying resources means CPR would go down, when CPR goes down hmmm.. doesnt that mean more profit? And with the third and final point (which will never happen) we would have the highest output of resources per day.
Think about that last sentence, the more we sell large and medium harvestors the longer the CPR will stay the way it is. If we kept them and only used them for ourselves, the CPR would go down drastically OR wouldnt effect us in the least cause we would have the most. Personally i have never bought resources from someone ever.
I disagree 100%. I have no problem with failures, but there needs to be some system. It seems to be a roll of thie dice right now.
I am almost a Master Architect, and last night I failed 3 times a row on a structural module. Those have a Complexitiy of 8. Now why the hell am I failing on a VERY simple item 3 times in a row. That's ridiculous.
Speak to anybody in the real world who has the equivalent "experience" to be a Master, or almost a Master, at any trade of craft. Do you think they constantly botch the simplest of tasks?? No. That's ludicrous.
There needs to be some sort of sliding scale, but all I can see is random failure. It's very discouraging, and one single critical failure on a large project could literally RUIN an Architect.
StormNet wrote:
I agree with Terrorbeat, For a large crit failure can devistate an architect. The roll of the dice failures is horrible. If you told me that if I finished the construction branch I would not ever get crit failures anymore or that if i made Master it would just never happen I could, if I had to, deal with it. But to fail totally randomly is absolutly horrible. I shudder every time I make any large structure. It is not an enjoyable shudder mind you either. I also think your our of your mind to make harvesters makeless resources and pay more maint. You must be backed bya PA. I can barely keep them up now. Also when servers are down and you pay 3x the rate to fix them is insane. I can't get on the server one day because it's down and I pay 3 times the maint AND no resources because it shut down to boot.
you missed my point.
this is what i said.
decrease Output Increase Pwr Usage and Maintentence ON NON EXPERIMENTED HARVESTORS
and INCREASE quality on EXPERIMENTED Harvestors.
And i agree random Crit Fails suck they need a better system but NEED to be in Game
Thanks Storm!
OK, so after I posted this, I started doing some crafting I need to get done.
Now bear in mind, I'm standing in front of a 80%+ crafting station I made, using 98% crafting tools, and every resource I'm using has an overall quality, unit toughness, and decay resistance of 800+. On top of that, I have the complete furniture line, so I've got the +35 to my structure assembly. Failed on 4 more structural modules AGAIN.
That's just ludicrous. It's like an accomplished carpenter not being able to drive a nail into a piece of wood.
FURY:
I don't necessarily disagree with that. I would like to see experimentation at LEAST make a difference in the harvesters. I'm not sure about the houses, maybe experimentation could change the maintenace costs.
Changing harvs at least would make our economy a little more balanced. Right now, every structure is identical, there's no reason to be loyal to any Architect other than if you're getting deals from him. We're all a dime a dozen, essentially. I try to differentiate myself with high quality service, but that's not a "solution" it's just a "workaround".
My question is Why do crit fails have to be a mystery? Just tell us strait up. Is it dependent on material quality or a random event? Whats the formula? I do not understand why Architects are considered the dogs of the game. We need to most xp to make it to our master profession yet they hurt us in every way possible. What Gives?
PS: I vote random event.
the only way i would be ok without haveing crit fails would be this
make larger items (even small houses) not able to create a prototype OR draft a schematic.
come up with a diff system that you have to use a personal crafting station where it forces you to experiment, (if they can get that to work) with the chance of really messing up if ur not skilled and able to make a superb item with higher lv.
or instead of the personal crafting station you have to go to the spot where it will be built, basically making harvestors and houses perm. This cant happen atm with the maintenece drawing away from pool, when turned off. But when they fix that this would really add to stradegy of placement and would also stop alot of would be miners.
Anecdotally failures seems to be based on material quality (Unit Toughness mostly for us). However the devs won't say straight up, which is part of their little game to make us figure out things for ourselves. We are the "early adopters" and some of us are going to choose beta and come out on bottom in the end. This isn't nevessarily a bad thing.
Anyway, I liked the EQ system (or was itDAoC? I can't remember). As you progressed you got less experience for low-end items, but at some point, your success rate for a low-end item became 100% and you'd never fail. You also didn't get any experience for the item.
This made sense, because doing something you can do in your sleep shouldn't get you much XP, but it also shouldn't ever really fail. Personally, from a selfish standpoint, I prefer the current system, because I still need lots of XP to hit Master. I like being able to grind out the structure blocks I need (manually or in factory) and get full XP for them. I don't mind the rare failure (failures have definitely gone down since I switched to a much higher grade ore), even though last night it cost me a manufacturing mechanism.
But speakin grealistically and how I think it should probably be, an architect with level2 skills all across shouldn't *ever* fail to make a structure block. The percentage success may be lower at random, but there should be no failures. Making a large house *is* where you should maybe fail, unless you're a master. But failures shouldn't be complete. Who in the real world can fail to make an entire house, after suceeding on all the component parts? You build the foundation, the frame, the wiring, the roof, then suddenly, when you attempt to hammer in the last few nails, the whole thing collapses??
Critical Failures, as they're implemented now, is my biggest gripe with being an Architect. I don't mind the occassional CF on a component. Fine. I always expect a loss like that from time to time. But to CF a finished product like a Large House or Heavy Harvester and then loose EVERYTHING, is NOT FUN. In fact, it makes the entire Architect profession NOT FUN. It's just TOO MUCH of a loss and once I make myself a bunch of heavy harvestors, I'm leaving the Architect biz until they fix this.
I'm sure there's lots of different ways they can go about fixing this, but here's a few of my ideas:
1. Limit the CFs onfinished items. Perhaps have a scale that the more resources/components being used, the less chance of failure.
2. Have CFs only loose the resources being used and not the components.
or what I would really like to see:
3. Have the resources/components lost due to a CF be random or based on some skill. Perhaps you only loose that 200 metal on one CF, but then loose 2wall structures and that500 Low Grade ore on another CF.
Either of these would stop having a CF cause the level of depression (not aggrivation or frustration, but depression) that it currently has. As it is right now, being an Architect, because of CFs with the larger items, is NOT FUN. Isn't every profession supposed to be FUN?
Anyways, that's my rant for the day.
Zax McTau