Architect Archive
Thread: Resolution for Archs *and* Lot Swapping
Page 1 of 2
zoynk
Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:16 pm
#1
I hate to post what has been said quite a few times already, including two other threads which are still active (I think) But...
What we know:
1) We make nothing disposable. The idea of harvester decay has been brought up several times.
2) Rumor has it that the devs wish to eliminate cross server lot swapping. This combined with the elimination of holo grinding will cause sales to drop even more so.
Why not kill two birds with one stone? Our original idea for harvester decay can solve two problems. It will allow architects to stay in buisness and it will eliminate cross server lot trading or at least make it one heck of a hassle.
Plug in some simple numbers.
Give harvesters 8-9 days (or the average resource rotation) of operation. When that time expires, they will require maintenance/repair. This of course will require lot traders/swappers to take down thier harvesters or suffer a non operational unit. Whether the harv can be repaired via a kit or strictly by an architect is up for debate. However, stressing that the harvester be in deed form when repaired will cause the 200+ lot traders to think twice. This also opens the door to wall experimentation being useful (for durability).
Why restrict the amount of structures a person can have admin on when that same harvester will be non functional if not tuned up per se'?
P.S. Please don't reply if you're going to say "Structure decay has been brought up X amount of times." I am only stressing this issue as it gives the devs a motive to incorporate harvester decay, since they plan on eliminating cross server lot trading/swapping.
What we know:
1) We make nothing disposable. The idea of harvester decay has been brought up several times.
2) Rumor has it that the devs wish to eliminate cross server lot swapping. This combined with the elimination of holo grinding will cause sales to drop even more so.
Why not kill two birds with one stone? Our original idea for harvester decay can solve two problems. It will allow architects to stay in buisness and it will eliminate cross server lot trading or at least make it one heck of a hassle.
Plug in some simple numbers.
Give harvesters 8-9 days (or the average resource rotation) of operation. When that time expires, they will require maintenance/repair. This of course will require lot traders/swappers to take down thier harvesters or suffer a non operational unit. Whether the harv can be repaired via a kit or strictly by an architect is up for debate. However, stressing that the harvester be in deed form when repaired will cause the 200+ lot traders to think twice. This also opens the door to wall experimentation being useful (for durability).
Why restrict the amount of structures a person can have admin on when that same harvester will be non functional if not tuned up per se'?
P.S. Please don't reply if you're going to say "Structure decay has been brought up X amount of times." I am only stressing this issue as it gives the devs a motive to incorporate harvester decay, since they plan on eliminating cross server lot trading/swapping.
Message Edited by zoynk on 06-11-2004 05:19 PM
Pawlin
Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:29 pm
#2
zoynk wrote:
...
Give harvesters 8-9 days (or the average resource rotation) of operation. When that time expires, they will require maintenance/repair. This of course will require lot traders/swappers to take down thier harvesters or suffer a non operational unit. Whether the harv can be repaired via a kit or strictly by an architect is up for debate. However, stressing that the harvester be in deed form when repaired will cause the 200+ lot traders to think twice. This also opens the door to wall experimentation being useful (for durability)...
What about the small folks like myself who also use our harvesters in a static setup?
The way I read this I'd have to redeed my harvesters ever 8-9 days to apply a kit to 'repair' them.
Right now I have my heavy minerals sitting behind my house mining the highest density metal or ore that shows up.
I don't know how common this is for folks only running a few harvesters. It wouldn't be the end of the world for me if implemented, but it would be causing me extra work.
I think you'd get the same goal if you required the owner of the harvester to apply a repair kit every x days. And not require the harvester to be in deed form.
That way it would hit cross server lot trades but not harm individuals doing static mining with their own harvesters. And it would be doable for people renting lots for static mining too, though they'd have to have more involvement from the lot owner.
Cafa
Fri Jun 11, 2004 11:33 pm
#3
Well when the crap gets too confusing to play on a daily basis and it turns into a second job I'll just make things for my guild and no one else.
Truly, most of the larger architects that quit active sales already feel this has happened from what I've discussed with them.
I will not spend twice as much time as I currently do playing an architect when I can simply group with a couple of MCH's, slice terminals and run 40k missions to make 100 times the amount of money.
Sorry if I sound too dour on this, but the constant addition of management to a profession to (supposedly) make it fun is just stupid.
Fivo Asia
zoynk
Sat Jun 12, 2004 7:45 am
#4
Yet the addition of new items to craft would be any different? Not exactly a process that would take hours to perform, especially if any profession could repair.
A lot of archs are commited crafters, don't have 4 alts, or even 40 million units of steel. I'd say more confusion would result from the above, then decay on harvesters.
A lot of archs are commited crafters, don't have 4 alts, or even 40 million units of steel. I'd say more confusion would result from the above, then decay on harvesters.
Niklesnitz
Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:22 am
#5
I see this only as an inconvenience. If people wish to retain their static harvs, they only need to get the owner to log into that server and redeed, repair and place again. Which that person will do for their server. While it is a pain, it does not stop them. If they really want to stop this,something else needs to be done.
ColForbin13thIr
Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:14 am
#6
It's not a bad premise really, but the idea of another maintenence sink for harvesters dosen't exaclty sound great IMO. And that's the problem, at best it's another time/money sink. Worse, harvesters are resource intensive. Harvester decay, even with repair kits, means eventually they will wear out (or the repair kits will work like weapon/armor repair kits... meaning they don't work very often). Yes, it would mean revenue to me the Architect, but I would get sick of replacing heavies for my fleet alone. I don't think the player base would be interested in replacing heavies on a monthly basis. Not to mention, it would make the cost of resources potentially go up quite a bit.
Honestly, you want a renewable source of invcome for architects ? I have one word. Turrets.
Honestly, you want a renewable source of invcome for architects ? I have one word. Turrets.
palladiumleader
Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:19 am
#7
I don't think there's a two birds with one stone solution here. Limiting the number of harvesters a character can have admin to is one possible deterrent for lot swapping, but it still won't really help since the other person will have to log in anyway just to move harvesters as stuff shifts to move them. It would just make it harder for guildmates to work together.
One possible solution to the architect salesproblem though, is to make the maintenance rate of harvesters go up over time, but very slowly. So say after a month or two the maintenance cost is double, which would be the same as every day going up 1-4 creds/hour. Hopefully the devs learned a little bit ofmath in college and can work out the formulas for that (it would be a simple linear acceleration and require a simple logarithmic calculation to figure maintenance use, and would only require perhaps one or two extra variables in data storage if they do it right). If they made this change, then it would do several things: it would increase the maintenance sink for the economy (especially for the extremely wealthy, who would be more likely to let their extractors go to a higher maintenance rate rather than bother with replacing them), it would give architects a source of regular income making challenging and fun things rather than just billions of stupid little light sources (I feel so sorry for the DEs with their customization packs that are lame to make and nobody wants anyway cause they wear off in a dayif you use your droid regularly), and it would greatly increase the amount of resourcesburned up by the economy rather than just accumulating as capital.
As for the server lot trading, the only thing that will truly solve the problem is to go around looking at stats for who's using the resources and which server the structure owner is actually playing on, and then start handing out paddlin's
zoynk
Sat Jun 12, 2004 5:54 pm
#8
I see this only as an inconvenience. If people wish to retain their static harvs, they only need to get the owner to log into that server and redeed, repair and place again.
Ah yes, but the problem is just as you mentioned. Having your 'swapper' meet up with you online at the same time doesn't sound too difficult. Then again, if you have 50-200 harvesters - it just might become a hassle. More so, then having that same swapper click on a repair kit of sorts every week or so. Lot swapping will be eliminated at some point. Whether it be restricting the amount of structures a person can have admin on (say 20) or implementing a system that would benefit two parties.
"I don't think there's a two birds with one stone solution here."
Add a new item and new system which would provide low but steady income for architects. At the same time create a hassle for lot swappers in general. Either way we make nothing disposable. Candles certainly didn't help. Architects waiting 6 months for the release of JTL, just to make sales, is hardly what I consider a situation to lay idle with. Sure, everyone might argue that sales will still occur due to people persuing different professions and new players. Plain and simple, architects have reached the structural demmand climax. There will be plenty of idle vendors. Simply adding a player garage won't save the profession. Your resolution is to increase harvester costs per month? I seriously doubt anyone would be willing to dump 160k into 8 heavies, for 3.5 days of harvesting. Still, what you're suggesting would kill two birds with one stone as well. It would sway the miners a little, being forced to pay double. Sure, if you want to get technical - yeah what I suggest might not kill two birds with one stone. But the devs would address two issues at once, which is the point.
" Yes, it would mean revenue to me the Architect, but I would get sick of replacing heavies for my fleet alone. I don't think the player base would be interested in replacing heavies on a monthly basis."
How many people do you know that keep a harvester up for more then 10 days without checking the hopper/harvester iteself? Most static lot traders I know check their hoppers within that time. Why? What's the point of having harvesters up/running if you're not sure they're harvesting? Also, what's the point of having harvesters up with full hoppers? With this in mind, I find it very difficult that the community would be replacing harvesters on a monthly basis. If people weren't concerned or didn't pay attention, then they probably wouldn't bother repairing their vehicles. I'm also not implying that a system of decay, with the same rate as vehicles be implemented. The rate of decay is obviously up for debate, which is the point you and others are obviously missing.
If lot swapping goes away, what will happen is prices will go up, and product availability will go down. Sure, this wont happen right away, but, it will happen.
The elimination of holo grinding will basically lower the demmand for resources in a whole, or at least enough for prices to go up and product availability to go down as well. It is bound to happen at some point. Whether or not architects gain something from such or suffer even more losses - is up to both the community and the devs. This is why I said "...kill two birds with one stone."
Sure, there are people that refuse to flood the market - some self-righteous statement to make themselves feel better, in order to save a dying economy. It's a bit too late for that. There are also some people who don't care what happens to architect, expecting the expansion to provide architects with what they need. Am I the only one that finds it ironic, that most items in this game suffer decay or can suffer damage? Weapons, armor, clothing, vehicles, droids (HAM), etc. We are the only crafting profession that creates nothing disposable (excluding BE's, unless a pet's vitality runs down to zero) and nothing which decays. Sure, adding a new structure would be great - I have no complaints. But a structure isn't going to save the profession as a whole, if every city were to already have that same structure.
*Most people keep their structures up-to-date with maint. So if someone planned on entering in that arguement, don't bother.
Message Edited by zoynk on 06-12-2004 08:55 PM
Reggi
Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:51 pm
#9
I see this only as an inconvenience. If people wish to retain their static harvs, they only need to get the owner to log into that server and redeed, repair and place again.
Ah yes, but the problem is just as you mentioned. Having your 'swapper' meet up with you online at the same time doesn't sound too difficult. Then again, if you have 50-200 harvesters - it just might become a hassle. More so, then having that same swapper click on a repair kit of sorts every week or so. Lot swapping will be eliminated at some point. Whether it be restricting the amount of structures a person can have admin on (say 20) or implementing a system that would benefit two parties.
I Agree, make it more of a pain in the ass situation, it may not eliminate cross server swapping all together, but it may drastically reduce it.
"I don't think there's a two birds with one stone solution here."
Add a new item and new system which would provide low but steady income for architects. At the same time create a hassle for lot swappers in general. Either way we make nothing disposable. Candles certainly didn't help. Architects waiting 6 months for the release of JTL, just to make sales, is hardly what I consider a situation to lay idle with. Sure, everyone might argue that sales will still occur due to people persuing different professions and new players. Plain and simple, architects have reached the structural demmand climax. There will be plenty of idle vendors. Simply adding a player garage won't save the profession. Your resolution is to increase harvester costs per month? I seriously doubt anyone would be willing to dump 160k into 8 heavies, for 3.5 days of harvesting. Still, what you're suggesting would kill two birds with one stone as well. It would sway the miners a little, being forced to pay double. Sure, if you want to get technical - yeah what I suggest might not kill two birds with one stone. But the devs would address two issues at once, which is the point.
I think that if we are able to create repair tools that act the same way as Armor repair / Weapon repair tools, i.e. there is a chance that you will totally funk up your harvester, rendering it useless. Also, I think as a Harvester Ages, it looses its BER.. which makes sense due to the ore mining units getting dull, the only way to sharpen them is to use a repair tool.. YOU BROKE THE ORE MINING AUGER!!! OH NO!!!.. Well it would creat more of a market for those Repair +1 SEAs you have laying around.
" Yes, it would mean revenue to me the Architect, but I would get sick of replacing heavies for my fleet alone. I don't think the player base would be interested in replacing heavies on a monthly basis."
How many people do you know that keep a harvester up for more then 10 days without checking the hopper/harvester iteself? Most static lot traders I know check their hoppers within that time. Why? What's the point of having harvesters up/running if you're not sure they're harvesting? Also, what's the point of having harvesters up with full hoppers? With this in mind, I find it very difficult that the community would be replacing harvesters on a monthly basis. If people weren't concerned or didn't pay attention, then they probably wouldn't bother repairing their vehicles. I'm also not implying that a system of decay, with the same rate as vehicles be implemented. The rate of decay is obviously up for debate, which is the point you and others are obviously missing.
See above.. I think Decay should affect the effectiveness as well as the durability of the equipment.. much the same as armor.
If lot swapping goes away, what will happen is prices will go up, and product availability will go down. Sure, this wont happen right away, but, it will happen.
The elimination of holo grinding will basically lower the demmand for resources in a whole, or at least enough for prices to go up and product availability to go down as well. It is bound to happen at some point. Whether or not architects gain something from such or suffer even more losses - is up to both the community and the devs. This is why I said "...kill two birds with one stone."
Sure, there are people that refuse to flood the market - some self-righteous statement to make themselves feel better, in order to save a dying economy. It's a bit too late for that. There are also some people who don't care what happens to architect, expecting the expansion to provide architects with what they need. Am I the only one that finds it ironic, that most items in this game suffer decay or can suffer damage? Weapons, armor, clothing, vehicles, droids (HAM), etc. We are the only crafting profession that creates nothing disposable (excluding BE's, unless a pet's vitality runs down to zero) and nothing which decays. Sure, adding a new structure would be great - I have no complaints. But a structure isn't going to save the profession as a whole, if every city were to already have that same structure.
I am hoping that, like structures, Starships will require a lot, and I mean A LOT or resources to create.. Low quality stuff for the Hull, and HQ stuff for the instrumentation.. but can we really place our hopes on this?? I dont think so..
*Most people keep their structures up-to-date with maint. So if someone planned on entering in that arguement, don't bother.
*Most people keep their structures up-to-date with maint. So if someone planned on entering in that arguement, don't bother.
Message Edited by zoynk on 06-12-200408:55 PM
96)?96:this.scrollHeight)">
"Oh lookie here, a little one star ninja got me. It's probably TH..." - Shrendyc
Master Smuggler
Master Architect
Master "Oh look, another revamp pushed back " Mad Man
Master Smuggler
Master Architect
Master "Oh look, another revamp pushed back " Mad Man
Reggi
Ziffus is Cool
Reggi
Sat Jun 12, 2004 7:56 pm
#10
Read this guys post.. makes a lot of good points
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=architect&message.id=58530
Reggi
Sytem
Sun Jun 13, 2004 12:03 am
#11
Lot swapping is the greatest things since toilet paper..
Why? Cause I can have many products in stock at all times, and at fairly low prices.. I have an alt thats a master architect/master artisan/master chef and if it werent for lot swapping, I wouldnt have much on my vendors.. What they need to do is increase the amount of lots allowable. If the game allows us to have multiple professions that require tons of resources like I have, then we should be allowed to place more harvesters.. If lot swapping goes away, what will happen is prices will go up, and product availability will go down. Sure, this wont happen right away, but, it will happen.
Why? Cause I can have many products in stock at all times, and at fairly low prices.. I have an alt thats a master architect/master artisan/master chef and if it werent for lot swapping, I wouldnt have much on my vendors.. What they need to do is increase the amount of lots allowable. If the game allows us to have multiple professions that require tons of resources like I have, then we should be allowed to place more harvesters.. If lot swapping goes away, what will happen is prices will go up, and product availability will go down. Sure, this wont happen right away, but, it will happen.
sharpie222
Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:39 pm
#12
I'm a master arch. & dont like this idea at all. Look in real life & the oil drill pumps run in the same spot until the source is gone (which would be a long time i'd imagine). But if they would move it, they would dismantle & reassemble elsewhere. Your asking for too much, i dont think people will pay for new heavy harvesters, you would see more of the cheaper, smaller versions selling. This would/could hurt us even more or not do much at all.
Now in real life, these drills would need maintained with parts right? So what about removable/replaceable parts made by us or remove the power option & let us create energy cells. Experimentation could play a role in the time it lasts (something like candles/lamps). Maybe like the pump itself be removable or replaceable (works for like 1000 hrs. at 100% experimentation). The pump would be more affordable for people & could last awhile also. But then again maybe decayable harvesters shouldn't become reality & we just need something else.
This is just what i thought of as i read this post, didn't put long thought or time into it. So if anybody has any ideas or thoughts to build on this by all means post it.
On a different note i do hate lot swapping across servers, i don't think the devs ever planned on this. I think if i read some of the patches/updates already out there that this was somewhat solved. Something like if a player deletes his character, all structures under his/her name (meaning he/she placed it & still uses their lot) they would be deleted with it. Also if he/she doesn't log into that character? (or was it the game in general), structures would disappear after like 2 months or something like that.
StumanKadir
Mon Jun 14, 2004 5:22 pm
#13
I have to voice my opposition to this suggestion as well. One thing that cross server lot trading does is to allow those of us with a single account to compete against the multi-account behemoths.
And to say "well get more accounts if you are serious" is a complete misnomer. I can afford one account, I can't afford 2 or more accounts. I have as much right to enjoy this game as those with more money than sense do, and lot trading allows me to do that.
Take away cross-server lot trading and watch the game economy on all servers die as players like myself leave in droves.
Page 1 of 2