Architect Archive

What is really funny about this is that I do not believe that decay will raise prices one cr.

Sortch we have seen what you want, you want a static game where no one needs to buy anything form anyone, that is not the game we want.

What we want, and you do not is a player economy, the buying and selling of services and items, for that to work some kind of decay has to be introduced into every craftable item.

Every item need to have a recuring need to buy it, be it as it is used, or over time.

No, what I want is really simple.

I want things that will HELP the players AND provide renewable incomes AND HELP the economy.

I DON'T want things that will HURT the players like YOU do.

Is it really that hard of a concept to grasp?

Provide a service to the players that will provide you with a renewable income and help the economy that HELPS the players instead of HURTING them?

Surely it can't be that hard of a concept to understand. I guess it is though.

IF you would do a little search rather than justbeing lazy and say I haven't had any ideas, then you will see I have made many suggestions.

What I DON'T see is you providing smarter ways of providing a SERVICE to the players. YOu only speak of decay which will HURT the players. It's like a broken record and a one track mind. You are stuck on decay instead of providing smart solutions to help people.

It's so easy for you to sit there and falsely claim I haven't tried to provide solution than to actually think and come up with some of your own.

Sure, some of my ideas may not be the greatest but, I have tried at least. Have you?

Service to the players? I am not about to support anything that makes SWG easier than it already is. The game is too easy now.

I am not about to support anything that will make architect more attractive than it alreadty is, there are too many architects now.

That is why I am for bringing back the need for insurance

That is why I am for making the cloning mean something, a reversion to the XP you had when cloned

That is whay I am for decay of one form or antoher on all craftable items.

The last thing this game needs is to make things easier for the players, it is too easy now. We need more things that take resources and money OUT of the system.

I'll give you an example to help clarify my position.

It's like just raising taxes to pay for a war versus selling warbonds which can later be sold back with interest. It provides a benefit to both parties without HURTING the person that baught them.

Yep, it is so obvious now. You are ONLY for ANYTHING that will negatively impact the players for your own benefit.

You are no better than the people that prey on innocent victims of disasters.

I have read many many threads.... and I have yet to find anyone that can show a way for demand to continue indefinetely without decay.

You want us to provide some clever new service to other players? What service is an architect supposed to provide which doesnt involve making structures?

Even if such a strange beast could be found... why again would everyone who selected this CRAFTING profession want to do something else?

Unfortunatley you are obviously every bit as blinkered as you claim we are. If you had read even a tiny fraction of the messages regarding decay you wouold see that we are having very active discussions on the ways to do it with the least negative impact. We are considering lots of possibilities... but you are chosing to completely ignore them.

If I put 10 of each heavy harvester on to each players account, how many new heavy harvesters would your clever ideas allow architects to make and sell? THAT is the fundemental problem.... without a mechanism to remove structures from the game there MUST come a time when there is no significant need for new ones. We are calling that mechanism for removal "Decay". Maybe it would be something that makes the player "Want" to detroy the structure themselves, who knows.... but we have come up with many possibilities.

Instead of expecting people to go searching all over the forums for you great ideas, why not post a quick precise here? Or maybe post links to the ones you consider most promising?

If you arent prepared to discuss something WITHIN the thread, then why bother posting in it?

He has no clue... decay will not benifit me at all, I own too many harvestors and such that will have to be replaced and I dont expect prices to increase a single cr.

I am for it becasue it will benifit the game, not me.

Whatever... several of you obviously have no clue and you claim I don't? lol

It's obvious your only desire is to have something that will negatively impact the players for your own persoanl gain.

Not ALL of us Architects are like this and I'm glad too.

I have provided some ideas. I have posted them. If you don't want to take the time to read them, that's up to you. You are STILL avoiding taking the time to come up with alternatives yourself and keep harping on other people not providing ideas in order to cover up the fact that you haven't tried to come up with ideas.

Your only idea is decay. It doesn't matter if you try a 1000 different ways to make it have the least negative impact on the players, it STILL is a negative impact.

I stand by my claim that you are the same type of people that prey on innocent people of disasters. You love to see disasters because it provides a boost to the builders of homes. Without disasters destroying homes, you wouldn't be happy because then that house would still be standing and you wouldn't have any work. It's the same thing and same attitude.

Quit trying to holler about other people not trying to come up with ideas (when they have) and provide some of your own. Is that too hard?

I guess the concept is beyond your understanding.

Where? Show me where I said I wanted to provide a service to hte players that made the game easier? Sure, some of my ideas does take away some of the major frustration in the game but it doesn't mean it makes it easier.

I am not neccessarily for making it easier, I'm just for providing a service that removes frustration, which leads to quitting. I'm for providing a service to the players to provide an income to me without trying to negatively impact the players like you are.

Providing a service that helps the players and the Architects doesn't mean it's a service to make it easier for the player. That's just an excuse you using to justify your decay.

I see now it's a waste of time to try and explain the concept of providing a service to players that also provides an income ot hte Architects. It appears to be above your heads and beyond your morality.

I am not hollering, you just dont get it.

Turning Architects into battery salesmen is nota solution.

Turning Architects into power-up sailesmen is nota solution.

Income via pay mantenance is the worst solution I have heard so far.

In order for ANY class to be viable long term, there HAS to be a recuring need for what they provide.

For combat types it is the fact that creatures return, you cant kill everything in the galaxy and it stays dead and so now there is no need for combat types.

For Weapon and armor smiths it is the fact that thier products decay.

The same should be true for all profesions.

We do get it, we still have hopes that you will too.

Show me an architect without at least 500k in the bank and I'll show you a novice architect. I think itIS about the greed. What can you spend it on, anyway?

Now for something constructive.

We don't have decay on structures because we pay maintenance fees to keep them in good condition, but it should cost more to maintain an older structure.

What we need is for architects to be able to experiment lower starting maintenance fees,and then have a set percentage increase in maintenance based on time. For example: Small house, starts at 384 credits per day, experimented down to 300 credits per day. Every day, you add 0.25% to maintenance, so that every4 days you add roughly 1% to the maintenance cost. In just ten days the original house (384) will have increased to almost 393 credits per day (rounded up). An increase of 9 credits per day, while the experimented house (300) will only have gone up 7 credits per day (also rounded up). After 30 days, you would have 413 and 323 respectively. This would eventually lead to houses that are justtoo costly to maintain.

Therefore sales of new replacementstructures should increase along with premium pricing on really low starting maintenance rate structures. Or, as an alternative, give architects a slicing-like ability or deed that could reduce maintenance costs by 5%, 10%, or something along those lines.

Just wanted to pass along some thoughts I had. I also wanted to comment that I was told by an master architect 7K each for completed walls was way too much. Please don't claim you pay 3 credits per resource,I know better and am tired of hearing it.

lol, I don't get it, roflol

Yep, you are stuck on decay that has a NEGATIVE impact on players. I do get it. I get the fact that you like having destruction provide you with an income. Oh, I get it alright. I get it that you are into disasters that detroy things so you can prey on people. Yep, I get it alright. Tells a lot about your character.

INSTEAD of decay....

What about GCW buildings like has been proposed? I mean you are an architect, that would provide you with renewable income BUILDING structures that can be destroyed. There is your decay.

There are tons of ways to provide a SERVICE for you greedy types. There are tons of ways of providing a service to the people other than relying on destruction to fill your pockets.

You just too lazy to think of anything and are stuck on destruction as a way to get you money.

Yep, I get it alright.

Tell the merchant that has many vendors and a LOT of product that they have to pull up all their vendors and all their product off those vendors every so often and put down a new house and then replace al lthe vendors and then put all that stuff back on them again. Tell them they have to do all that work because greedy architects wanted structure decay.

Tell people they have to pack everything in their house up every so often because greedy architects wanted structure decay.

That's what the daily maint. fee is for. They already pay for decay.