Architect Archive
Thread: Renewable Revenue
I like option 1
Make it so a house will decay in about5 monthseven withmaintenance. Sometime when it is nearing the end of its life, an architect (and only an architect) can Visit the House and do repairs to bring it back up to full strength. Because the architect has to travel to job site, we will be able to ask more, and it is more realistic, which I like. The length of time (5 months) should be a long one so it is not too big a burden to the house owner.
For harvesters of medium or large size allow them to be repaired but reduce the time that they lastalso. Even if fully maintained a reasonable amount of life for one would be about 2 months (Again so it is not too large a burden for the owning player) Once again if an architect visits the site and does repairs the harvesters strength is reset to full.
For personal harvesters give them a lifetime (even with maintenance) that only lasts 2 months. This will create a lasting market for personal harvesters.
All of these proposals require that there be two types of health for a harvester or house, one related to credit maintenance, and one related to architect maintenance.
I really dont think that decay is a good idea to put onto any of the structures. Structures already need maintenance (which is a pest anyway)and harvesters also need energy; thus people with these already have to spend hours running around the place keeping up maintenance and allocating energy, which in my view isnt much fun to begin with. Add the fact that resources shift (how annoying! I found that out when I placed my first harvester and the next day resources had shifted and I ended up mining nothing for a day.....) and it doesnt make the mining experience very fun at all.
Now add in decay on top of all this, or even limited deedreclaim, people would have to be either very dedicated to running around a vast world surveying all the time or just give up. I know it may be argued that if you make something decay then it will become a consumable item, however if you create too much hassle for very little gain or just make it so tedious, then the 'game'for whichwe're paying $14.95 a month wont be fun and therefore not worth paying for.
Even with housing and furniture I dont really see how anyone would bother with something thats mostly aesthetic if it had to be replaced all the time. People buy decay items such as guns and armour because they need them, houses are little more than glorified storage and vending machines.
I think a good way to make money for architects would be allowing them to customize structures. Instead of everything looking generic we should have something akin to the image designer profession, have an Exterior Design branch or just incorporate the Construction branch which does nothing anyway,where you could change housing colour, add windows, doors etc etc An even better way may be to allow 'add ons'; housing extensions extra rooms or even integrated factories/harvesters. It would be cool to have a house that had solar panels on the roof 
Of course all this with increased maintenance and ongoing income for architects. To go further you could also have Interior Design where you could change the inside appearance; I hate the way Corellian houses look inside, they look like clinics instead of houses.
With all this you would then be able to differentiate between peoples houses, have commercial buildings look like shops/cantinas etc instead of just another house, and it would look much better if you had a proper door sign/sign on the roof than the floating white label you have now on structures.
Most importantly it would make the architect profession fun and interesting, rather than just a skill to grind your way up so you can make a PA hall for your guild.
I know all this would be a massive undertaking, but the profession needs content and SWG at the moment is very lacking in this aspect.
From a miners point of view (non architect)
On the issue of decay, I really think you are barking up the wrong tree on this issue. Anything that imposes a higher cost on resource gathering will only hurt you in the long run. A redeeding kit may well be a compromise that us unofficial miners could live with, but we are already paying redeeding fees to the great money sink in the sky and I dont see SOE removing any money sinks from the economy.
Destroyable Faction structures seems to be the most logical way for you to be looking for a consumable product to make for the long run. Get the devs to change faction rewards from "A turret for xx faction points" to "A turret schematic" that an architect can turn into a deed. Personally I would like to see all the faction perks being brough back into the player economy (Droid engineers making AT-STs, Bio Engs making StormTroopers, Armoursmiths making stormtrooper armour) with faction points being used to purchase the right to own, not the deed itself.
Making general structures attackable by opposing factions should not ever happen, people have to sleep and only large PAs would ever bother factionalizing if you risked losing your home / harvesters everytime you looked the other way. Making a house get a TEF when the homeowner was overt/TEFd and resident would be interesting, but probably open to abuse (picture gangs of overt rocket launcher armed architects camping homes in the hope of drumming upnew business)
Want to see more houses. You can take the same designs and just let the architect public tell you how to redesign the interiors. Kill the hallways, make the rooms roomy, etc.
Want to see buildings that are not houses but are stull buildings, like warehouses. An easy design would be a generic medium with no interior walls, and make it a 4 lot building so you get max efficiency for dropping items.
Customizable furniture - assuming that people still want furniture ( I think they will, tho not in mass quantities; I still sell lots of furniture). "What color do you want your couch? What exacly is Peuce?"
I kinda like the idea of an Architect getting credit for the maintenance that is being paid into a house.
Maybe something can be added where the maintenence costs aren't actually used until an architect actually comes by and does some repairs? You'd continue to plug money into the house, but maintenance isn't actually done until an architect has done it.
I'd also like to see Architects involved in redeeding houses. We should be able to make "Redeeding kits" for each structure type. In order to redeed your Medium Naboo House you'd have to purchase a "Redeeding kit: Medium Naboo House" from your friendly Architect.
Mantyss Xin'Shou of Gorath
Here is an ideafor altering architect's to have a renewable resource.
Change maintenance to Tax. Paying Tax is optional. Rates for taxes would vary depending upon the proximity of your building to a city and which planet you are on. Corellia and Naboo would have higher tax rates. Tatooiene would have a lower tax rate. If a city agent happens to see a building that hasn't payed (depending on your faction standing) it could decide to close operation of the building or start attacking it causing structural damage. A building that has enough backtaxes equivalent to a redeed cost would be "reclaimed" by the city.
City agents would have a higher chance of patrolling areas close to the city and patrolling near larger buildings.A small house out in the middle of nowhere might not have to ever worry about paying taxes but getting an architect out that far to repair it might be difficult.
When player cities are introduced, the mayor and the city guards would be able to patrol the area for non-paying citizens and be able to destroy or close down deliquent structures. Taxes gathered from these structures would go to the mayor's budget for upkeep of city structures.
Introduce natural structure damage over time. Houses might take 1% of damage over5 days. Factories might take 1% damage over 4 days and harvestors might take 1% of damage over 3 days. Houses are built to withstand the elements by nature thier nature and design and take less damage from the elements. Harvestors have a variety of complex mechanisms that degrade through usage.
Structural damage might reduce effiency of the havestor/factories and show a visual degredation of all three. Having the structure acrue a certain percentage of structural damage would make the structure unusable. Factories would cease to operate, harvestors would not harvest and buildings would not be enterable. Damage over time past this point would accelerate to cause the structure to collapse (disappear) within a few days.
Introduce natural weather phenomenon that causes structural damage. Hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, storms, etc. These could be created as non-colliable creatures that do structural damage (even damage to players or creatures for phenomenon like tornadoes or lightning storms). Camps might "keep out" a lightning storm (same way they keep out crazed durni) but a tornado would rip up anyone no matter what camp they were in. Some structures would take less damage from the elements they were built to withstand. Tatooiene houses wouldn't take as much damage from sand storms. Generic planet houses with take an average amount of damage from any weather occurance where as specific planethouses would be granted speacial protection from the more common weather effects.
Introduce structural repair kits that each useage will repair some of the damage to the house.
This idea treats structures a little more like players/creatures/pets/droids.
This has the benifit of ...
A. Removing the complaint of "I already pay maintenance so I shouldn't need an architect to repair it."
B. Matching reality a bit closer
C. Makes owning a larger house and/or closer to a city a luxury
D. Motivates structure owners to build somewhere other than at the no-build zone just outside of town.
E. Introduces a renewable resource for architects.
F. Motivates home owners to get repairs done to their house either throughout threat of structural collapse or so that their house doesn't look in disrepair (visual clues of structural damage).
G. Natural phenomenon (besides just plain looking cool) would generate small economic booms for architects.
H. Motivates players to not be outsidea city/building/camp if the weather is looking bad. Standing unprotected out in a lightning storm/sand storm would be a bad idea...maybe not fatal but a bad idea never the less.
Not a fan of the weather/destruction idea.
1) My time in this game is monopolized by enough things already without needing to worry about getting carted off to Oz by a tornado. I simply can not afford the time to "wait out" the weather if it looks crappy outside. The day/night cycle in this game is already unpredictable enough without having to delay things I need to do. If I need to go "feed" my harvesters, I can't wait out a storm, because I can't spend all day playing this game. Maybe other people can, but I have to work, and also have to maintain some semblance of a social life. Maybe when the "school year" is back in full effect, we'll see less people onthe servers...you know, the ones who manage to play all day every day....but i simply don't have more time to piss down my leg about this...I'm already annoyed that in a time where I can travel from planet to planet in the time it takes my computer to load the world, I still have to dink around for 10 minutes waiting for a shuttle.
2) I know people aren't getting it through their heads, and I'm sorry for those actually contributing to this discussion for mentioning it again, but the "cut of the maint fees" will destroy the economy. I hope no one is seriously considering this idea anymore.
Acer
CN=acer.moenia.naboo.kettemoor
The main thing that needs to change is to give players some reason to purchase items from a Master Architect. Many novice architects trade off credits for xp, they get more xp so they charge less. What benefits do Master Architects get? Wow, we can build a PA Hall for a ridiculous amount of materials. Wow, we can build 4 pieces of furniture from master level (since most of the resources needed haven't spawned).
Perhaps the best way to do that... is to have durability influence the amount of maintenance that must be paid. Therefore, a house purchased from a Master Architect (who uses experiment points to increase durability) costs less to upkeep. Perhaps make efficiency actually do something in regards to harvesters -- a more efficient harvester will harvest more materials than a shoddy one built by an engineer. This way allows us to benefit from the hours of grinding that we put in previously. Master weaponsmiths are in high esteem because they can build better weapons. Master Architects are spit upon as players pass because they charge more than novice's for the same goods.
If there isn't some reason to want to be a Master Architect they're going to start falling away from the profession.
That is all.
Ganson,
How would making it so harvesters hurt an architect in the long run? It will not drive down business in the short run and it will sustain business in the long run.
I do like your other ideas.
Adune wrote:
If you want to add a long term need to the profession, give us a vital role in the civil war.
Change Construction to be a Military Installations line. Have it include basic turrets, and other structures that would be needed in the civil war. Shield generators for structures, defensive structures, etc. Make houses/harvesters/etc owned by factioned people attackable, and add the need for them to be defended. Give us building repair skills to repair combat damage to buildings.
This turns architect into more than simply a money making crafting class, but a class that has long term need, and usability in the civil war. Any serious combat PA would need a couple archs simply to keep up defensive structures/etc. Balance defensive structures so that they are powerful enough to require a serious attack to get through. The potential damage caused by an attack needs to be balanced with the difficulty of succeeding in an attack.
This is just such a good idea I can only hope they would truly add it.
Jezzebelle - Master Architect - Wanderhome - <ASC>
Decay is not the answer and I hope the Devs do not go for it. It's funny how people think the devs are nothing but "nerfers", yet when given an option to improve things they themselves think only of how to best screw people out of what they have earned and achieved.
You don't take a commercialenvironmentand make it better by makingthe product less desireable. Decay will be one more reason people wont want to buy or hassle with a house.Many people have empty lots, a LOT of empty lots. Not everyone has a house or furniture for their houses. In business, THESE are the people we would focus on selling to.
A big stumbling block is price, which is something even we can't discuss without a 8 page thread of bickering. Some don't buy things becausedon't want the hassle of the maintenance. Some can't find a convenient spot to drop a house or factory. Some want something for their thousands of credits that goes beyond a place to just sit. Some can't decorate it to a level that they would like. Many I have talked to don't buy products because they have no functionality, or grant no perks, priveleges, or bragging rights.
It is my opinion that ideas that cause people to WANT to BUY our products are the most productive ones.
New items that compliment and move the story line forward are my favorite ones. Structures such as outposts and first aid stations that provide bonuses to favorable faction and are destructable to the oposing factions top my list. Let the players destroy each others stuff, don't let the dev's take the wrap with decay. The framework is already in place with nests.. One idea I like that is positive is allowing architects to make the outposts or stations and that when placed (like a nest in missions)would actually count towards their factions GCW score. Opposing sides can try to take them out (in my ideal minds eye an alarm would shout so factions would know something is under attack). Anyway, It would help take fights outside of city limits, and provide strategy and opportunity in a galactic struggle. I am not saying that my idea is onethat will change the situation, heck, I'll be the first to admit it isn't the best of ideas, I just happen to like it.
The point I am actually trying to make with this post is that we need to bring about change that will successfully increase demand and provide people with opportunity at the same time, instead of trying to be so destructive and take something away from people.Ideas need to be offered up and instituted that give gameplay potential to the public. IF it is decided that something needs to be removed, it should come about as a product of players actions, not dev nerfing!!!
I don't think they should decay even when paying maintinace at least not houses. There is too much involved when furniching and vending out of the house. Possibly harvesters could since they do a lot of work and what not.
I do like the idea that an architect could make something needed for the house. I have and idea that goes with this possiblility. What if you changed it from maintinace fee to say something like power fee or land fee. There is nothing that happens really when you go late on the maintinace fee curently so decay on houses does not work. What if the house decayed over time and the decay decreased the amount of items your house could hold and architects could craft and house repair kit or storage enhancments or something and this would provide a market for us in this way.