Architect Archive

I disagree with the implementation of any kind of permanent decay or repairing needed on existing structures over and above what there is. The community find it bad enough keeping track of credits in houses / structures etc, without having to run around finding someone to also do repairs on it every couple of weeks.

For renewable income, you have to look towards supplying things for the GCW. Defensive walls, turrets etc. Where damage to these acts in similar ways to armour so that ultimately they have to be replaced through damage decay or destroyed.

Another possible addition to our building capabilities is a series of 1 off (no manufacturing) refinerys. Randomly create +ve and -ve adjustments to a resource attributes like the current weapon powerups.. limited usage and we burn resource units trying our best to get the +ve and -ve adjustments we know our customers would want.... just an off the wall thought that needs a lot of work to develop into a complete idea

---

Xohamz wrote:

As I am a software developer, you will hear me use terms like "code" and "reusable" etc. Essentially I am try to tell the developers when I know changes will be easy.

Here's an easy one. You know how houses and camp can be place on really hilly terrain right?

Ok, architects get a new schematic for a framework, or derrick, that can be used to put a harvester of whatever size... anywhere. Now, this thing can only be used once and is lost when the harvester is moved / destroyed. There is already code to auto-magically level terrain for house and camp placement. Reuse that code and add the framework graphics around it. We won't care if it doesn't look great, really. It would be nice to use the nice deposits that are in the mountains.

Not everyone would need these, so they would be luxury items for experienced crafters. But since they only get used once, which could be rationalized by the fact that all terrain is different, we now have a consumable.

---

Is there a SIX STARS! Woot!

Mentioned this a while back. Terrain modifiers would be worth their weight in gold to many players. And not just flattening. I would LOVE to live on a hill in my city! like a really sheer hill with an amazing view! They go for bucks out here in California, why not in the game!?!

Fivo Asia

I think repair kits should be implemented on harvs and houses in the exact same manner they are (essentially) on pets. Don't screw with people if they keep their maintenance up to date. But (as when your pet gets killed) the VITALITY of the harv/home/factory is damaged there are REAL DEFINED diminished capabilities to it until you go get the (isert your label) repair kit from the architect.

Oh, and anything that requires me to mine anoth 1000k of ore a week I am totally against!

Fivo Asia

This is my personal opinion on this subject ( not a summary of yours)

Decay is such a touchy subject. because it effects so many people, and to change it now would agitate so many people. Should it be there? Absolutely, should have been there from the start. Is it to late to implement it now? Maybe.. I have had alot of discussions with my customers about this subject and was a little surprised at some of the responses.. Mostdo see that if nothing is done our market will get very tight.

I think at this point in time we need to implement decay in another way (other than just when time runs out building goes poof) I do like the idea that there should be more penalties if your structure goes into the negative maintenance.

So this is what I see as a solution.

Tuneup/ Overhaul Kits.. these would be needed every few weeks (time decreases more rapidly the when structure is redeeded..) Say it is 100 ticks (ticks = 4 or 5 hours) when u redeed it eats up 10 ticks..

Harvester Enhance kits.. These would work like the weapon upgrades.. 2 tiered effect as quality is improved..First effect would be a BER boost (not huge but noticable) Second would be an operating efficiency boost (would lower maintenance costs and power consumption) These would be added when you pay maintenance andpower.. and wouldbe on a timer.

One Use Miniature Mega Harvester.. this is just a brainstorm that i had after reading someones suggestionsabout the frustration of "Gold inThem There Hills" This would be a harvester the size of apersonal(same placement restrictions too) but the BER of a Heavy.OncePlacedYou select your resource type, add power, add maintenance, (which would cost lil more than a heavy).. When you turn it on you can not change your resource type ever again(prevents static Harvesters.)..and when your resourcevien shifts you remove resourcesand destroy structure(not possible to redeed this structure at all it will be destroyed)The idea of this is for those great resources that hit our planets that seem to only like to concentrate in mountains..Many of the high concentrations can support quite a few personals but that isstill not asefficient as alarger harvester on a lower concetration.. (I still feel the pain of that steelwith 4 stats 950+ that had a 93% vein in the mountains and had to settle for 67% in a"Placeable zone".. TheseHarvesters would cost us about 3 or 4 times the resources required for apersonal.. andI am thinking would sell in the 5-10k range.... (will people pay it?Yes theywill I have a rental business going now where people pay 5k each week for mediums and 10k for heavies very popular)..

that is just some of my ideas..

I don't believe in House Decay which may result in destruction of the building. I do however support a kind of decay principle for all structures i.e. an increase in maintenance costs over time, which can be corrected by either 'major repairs' or by replacing the structure. This then leaves it up to the individual to decide whether they wish to replace, repair or merely live with the higher costs. This is similar to how it works in RL, the older a structure is, then in general the more it costs in upkeep. Major repairs will reduce the maintenance level to somewhere between 'new' and 'current' levels and could be done through a repair tool with a number of charges which represent certain levels of repair, e.g. 10pct per 'charge'. It could also be possible to really refine this idea by allowing each 'repair' to only take the structure up to 90% of previous 'fully repaired' level for structures such as Harvestors and factories (NOT HOUSES), allowing these to eventually reach an 'unrepairable' (irreperable?) state requiring replacement. But this last is possibly too much to ask for.

oh, and whilst I think of it, perhaps the experimentation on durability for things such as walls and storage units could affect the 'deterioration rate' ? At least then it would mean something.

I really am befuddled+sp+ by the fact that some people would rather see 50% of their profession (yes, two branches of the tree, furnish and housing) come to a screeching halt ala player city structures and not be bothered by it????????

**edit** that was a long sentence.

Anyways, yeah GCW structures would be cool. However, some of you guys are saying you would, essentially, be happy with selling a house once a blue moon to a new guy?

The perfect example of saturation is player city structures. AND with the immenent nerf to crossserver swaps, you will sell a house, well you may sell one once a year.

Something has to be done, wether you like it or not.

I apologize, there was nothing constructive in my above post.

Here is something I noticed. I just upgrade my gaming machine, so now I can get graphics effects I could not before.

Anyways, now when I approach a house and it starts to fade into view, I noticed that you first see a "framework" before the house outtershell comes into view. This leads me to believe (perhaps erroneously), that some sort of renovation system can be implemented w/o loosing the house foundation/frame in fact keeping all your valuable goods and decorations intact.

However, for the "renovation" to be need, a MX over time decay type system needs to be implemented, so at some point you are faced with the decision of higher mx costs or renovation costs.

It is the best I can explain it, so it will be my last post on the subject. If I am in the minority, and most would rather see, half of their profession useless, so be it.

BTW, I have not seen the above effect on harvesters. However, harvesters also need a mx over time decay implementation.

About the only thing I oppose decay on is furniture. Mainly most peopel will recycle their furniture (specially if we are ever given a more intuitive furniture movement interface) over time, different looks, ambiance, ect, etc.

I'm sure "they" (the nebulous player base, of which I am one) would hate decay on architectural items. "They" hated the idea of decay on clothing, but "fortunately" said decay has absolutely no effect; your enhanced t-shirt of slouching remains just as useful at condition 0 as it was when it was 1000. Don't get me started.

Weapons and armor decay, and *nobody* much minds, because 1) it's always been the case, and 2) they can't change it anyway. Entropy, however, is not limited to mere disposables.

I'm not saying houses, harvesters and furniture should decay as rapidly as weapons do, but that they do not decay at all makes no sense. Until they do, there will be precious little renewable income for architects, just as there isn't for tailors. (Don't get me wrong, I make a pretty good living at both. It's the underlying coherence, or lack of it, that bothers me more than anything.)

Lack of popularity from a highly self-interested "them" group is not a valid measure of how good or bad an idea might be. Paying customers in RL would like to see everything last forever and cost less than a buck, but they haven't swayed the Earth devs yet.

I agree with every word quoted below and could not have said it better myself. It seems ridiculously logical to me - fix two large architect problems/issues (no GCW role and limited renewable income) with one solution.

On decay/repair:I'm not a handyman, a carpenter, a plumber, or a painter. I'm an architect.

---

ZamOceanjogger wrote:

I disagree with the implementation of any kind of permanent decay or repairing needed on existing structures over and above what there is. The community find it bad enough keeping track of credits in houses / structures etc, without having to run around finding someone to also do repairs on it every couple of weeks.

For renewable income, you have to look towards supplying things for the GCW. Defensive walls, turrets etc. Where damage to these acts in similar ways to armour so that ultimately they have to be replaced through damage decay or destroyed.

---

On boosting harvester output: The economies (at least Radiant's) are already FLOODED with resources. The net economic inflow is incredibly high already. This inflow should NOT be increased!