Architect Archive

Let me see. I'm using somewhere in the region of 2 million units of resources every couple of weeks to stock a couple of modest vendors with mostly BER10's and some fusions.

I calculated my prices based on a 2cpu basic cost for grind materials (modules, walls, turbines) and approximately 5 cpu for the high quality resources needed to finish the deeds.

I can understand why raising the prices isnt a problem for some. I can understand why mass lot trades might be undesireable to the devs : but I must admit those changes would make a massive reduction in the fun of this game for me.

I could suffer the loss of harvestors. after all I can afford to pay 10cpu for the resources and maybe get enough to maintain my needs.. but what I cant afford to maintain is the factories I'm running. I dabble with weaponsmith. I work as an architect and doctor. I'm running 12 factories, not all constantly. I let my friends and guildmates use them.

I've got 18 lots tied up in them. Thats the change I fear: admin on factories being removed.

As to lot trades: So what if i can work with a couple of friends who mostly play on other servers and return the favour for them? If you craft, or PvP, or PvE the reward isnt money: its getting some fun in return for you time. Its just monopoly money.

Changes such as this would dramatically increase the resource prices. It'll make several rich people that hold massed resource wealth in reserve vastly richer and superior crafters. It will further widen the gap between establish crafters and those that are new and wish to establish themselves. (i'd never have been able to compete by using large scale production of cheaper product to establish reputation in either the doctor crafter market, or then moving into being an architect ). Most of the players I interact with dont care to manage harvesters or lots or craft. They grind because they have to. They craft because it makes money and when they have 'enough' they quit for a while and go back to Jedi levelling, or PvE/PvP.

This is going to mostly impact those people that play to craft.

If my resources just cost me 5+ cpu.. (and im competing with those that are happy to pay 10cpu or 200cpu for avian. as they can buyout the market with their establish millions and nkow they'll recoup their investment).. my prices will double or treble. How do you get a new player (which always seem to be a refernced benchmark) to afford a 300k fusion gen, any more than a 150k fusion ?

---

ThothTheWise wrote:

My main worry is that they cannot really stop us. They can make it a tad more of a hassle..but the Miner vocation will live on. Miners from other servers will just start banding together and form a crossserver conglomerate that deals only with other crossserver dedicated miners.

---

Quite right, so now organized cross server lot utilization and people moving harvs across server lines is what will probably happen to the serious miners which are probably what people on this thread would consider the "threats".

---

Fuss wrote:

I support doing anything to hurt Cross Server Lot Trades. Even if this isnt a permanent fix, it will make such models harder to run and therefore reduce them. There is going to be way too many resources on the servers considering the number of players active. Unless starships have very high resource costs (extremely high) the resource market will never recover. Which makes me wonder why anyone wants to be a full time miner anyways right now. Sorry I just don't think your model should survive as is. This however will hurt Architects in the short term.

Fuss Bango

Master Arch/Artisan/Merchant

---

Yeah especially since the harvesters used for the hologrind and used for lot trades will probably be recovered by their owners. Some folks might let them burn up, but I imagine the rest will want something for them and expand the secondary market for used harvesters which should depress harvester prices and reduce demand for harvesters in general, even as costs rise for architects if they buy resources. This wouldn't be as bad of a thing if there was harvester decay which many of us agree would be good. But my personal opinion is that there will never ever be harvester decay or any other architect decay. People in this thread seem to like referring to how things as how the devs intended things to be. Deeds that don't decay is one of those intended things.

---

Redguard wrote:

My take on the 3 option presented.

1. Remove Admin Functionality - Not one of the best ideas as it makes cooperative and casual play difficult.

2. A limit to the amount of lots an account has - I legitimately play on 4 servers and thereis no reason that I should only have 10 lots per account. I could possibly see a limit but 10 is too low.

There is a limit to how many Lots an account may Possess. That Number is 80 lots per account. You get 8 toons on 8 servers. They are however being inventive...the FS Slot counts as a toon yet since its on the same server i would bet they will SHARE the same 10 lots. (I just happen to possess 4 accounts in my household as well as friends who have given me their account info who also possess 4 accounts)

3. Harvester Certifications - An idea that I was initially opposed to but it's looking more attractive every day. Yes people will grind out the profession it's attached to but that still means that there will be some interaction with the server population. If people quit over this thats just great because if they cant come around to seeing this as the common sense approach to fixing this problem then they probably are not invested in the game in the first place.

I agree on this..it will limit it greatly as it will become an inconvenience.

Some alternatives

1. Make using a lot cost credits- A land tax or small feewhich can only be paid by the legitimate lot owner.

2. Make Harvesters use additional lots...personal -1, Medium - 2 and Heavy - 3.

3. Declare cross server lot trading a bannable exploit and monitor admin and character activity

The idea is to inconvenience both parties involved in cross server trading. If it becomes inconvenient fewer people will participate in the activity but it probably wont stop.

Very well thought out Alternitives. One thing I would add is IF they somehow Made a "mining" type profession line (goes along with certs) then most people who today Mine, would go the path of least resistance and not look for ways to accomplish the same goal.

---

---

GraySeven wrote:

---

MinerMighty wrote:

Spacesloth, what makes it acceptable for combat oriented professionals to suppliment their income through mining (an artisan and crafter trait) without using up additional skill points, and not acceptable for dedicated crafting professionals to suppliment their income through combat without picking up additional combat skills?

---

This argument doesn't work. Combat-oriented professions can supplement their income by mining with harvesters, but Crafting-oriented professions make their money crafting, and any money they earn mining is also considered supplemental. Mining is not an artisan and crafter trait or skill, surveying is. With surveying, you get an ability that gives you a bonus in that it allows mining to be more profitable. So, an Artisans advantage is in being able to place harvesters on a high-density, resource-specific site ensuring that they can pull out good resources at a lower cost per unit...

Managing vendors isn't a merchant trait or skill either the skill is placing vendors but they're going to change that.Mining may not be a crafter trait or skill but it should be.

The rantings over on the Artisan board for Harvester Certification are all about people trying to make a starting profession as profitable as the elite professions by monopolizing what they wrongly feel is their exclusive ability to mine. Using any of their "arguments" for certification isn't a good way to give pro's and con's of cross-server trading.

I think there should be harvester certifications but not exclusive to artisan.All crafters even doctors and smugglers should be able to use harvesters, however fencers and rifleman should not.

---

---

LoneWulff wrote:

Managing vendors isn't a merchant trait or skill either the skill is placing vendors

---

Go over to the merchant boards and tell them that, better put on your flame retardant suit while you're at it.

---

joined42904 wrote:

Something Halaster and I can agree on:

Good riddance, CraftDragon. You seem to me to be an exploiter who most likely sells things on ebay. I don't think we really need your sort in the game.

And Halaster, you make a good point about the re-admin issue. This is the same sort of thing that could occur if we allow hopper lists but not admin rights.

The no-admin solution is starting to look better after I tried to come up with a compromise.

---

I provide a service few can offer. Volume resources. I cannot keep up with the demand, which proves I am needed. Your crappy remarks mean nothing. If you remove volume resources from the galaxy, keep in mind that your next weapon may cost you 5 million credits.

---

KRONOS1974 wrote:

Id rather have people quit, than take advantage of the system and the resource market. Let alone make it harder for the newer player to start out. Harvester fields hurt the economy and our servers.

People afraid to lose their harvesting fields need to learn to make money another way than milking the server from using something that wasnt meant to be in the game.

But i do not agree with the admin nerf. That would suck because i hhave 3 alts and each have admin on everything i put down, i also rent lots from friends for factories.

But i am 100% for the decay on structures. Nothing lasts forever, and since so many want to bring real life issues into the game they would know that.

Decay rate should be like 1-2% on homes, 10-15% on harvesters bi-weekly/monthly. Would take a year for a house to decay and a few months for a harvester.

Then again they added life spans to candles and lamps- even when time runs out they still work unless you move them. LOL

---

I dont hurt the economy, I provide a service (volume resources) that keeps your cost of goods manageable. Without us volume suppliers, your next weapon could cost 5 million credits.

Because it will make folks take the same amount of time and work per harvester (roughly) regardless of how many accounts they have. If someone with 4 accounts can manage 40 harvs in only 150% the time that it takes a person with one account to manage 10 harvs, that's unfair.

I think this is basically what is intended, or if anything, increased resource output should become increasingly less efficient. What we see instead is that large scale production is more efficient which is the very problem. It seems somewhat likely that something will be done about this, and if nothing is, I think this will prove detrimental the economy (especially for items that require lower amounts of resources such as meds, weapons and dmuggler goods). Many think that the disappearance of holo-grinding will magically fix everything. I doubt this. Taking away hologrinding will only remove one resource sink in the system thus making the resource gluts worse, if anything.

StGabe.