Architect Archive
Thread: Renewable Revenue
Deoka wrote:I am totally opposed to decay of structures.
There will always be a market for our goods. Haven't any of you ever heard of churn? It's a fact with MMO's that people leave the game and new ones enter it all the time. Decay would only be necessary in a stagnant game, and SWG is far from being stagnant (despite the ranters on the dev board).
This is, to put it mildly, an ineffective strategy. As has been shown by Ultima Online, players tend to sell or give their items to other players before leaving. Most likely, a new player will be able to acquire a house directly or indirectly from a departing player at a lower price than they will be able to acquire it from an architect (perhaps even for free).
Further, the "churn market", even assuming all new players buy houses from architects, will be quite small; probably only enough to support three or four architects per server. More people ought to be able to be architects than that. (Although, obviously, market forces will always limit the number of architects.)
deoka churn will not save architect .... the fact of the matter is since structures can be redeeds any outgoing player can simply redeed it and give it away or sell it cheap. this type of thing happens alot on eq with outgoing players selling off thier inv cheap or simply giving it away. plus unless there is a massive influx of new players ona regular basis the demand will never exceed the need for 1 or 2 architects per planet at the least and 1 per city at the most.
The problem is not only do our structures not decay, (which is stupid because EVERYTHING does including you and I.) but also that there is such a limited functionality to them. I am working on a complex system idea inspired by a reply Zar made a while back that allows people to own a house similar to the current system but creates a re-supply demand for those who do more such as merchants and miners and military who make money or faction based on our items. I
I believe there will be a decent demand for heavy harvesters over the next 2 months. By that time, Urban Planner will be in place, and some archs will choose that.
Bottom line though, there are too many Archs on most servers. Currently, there are a lot, because there is heavy demand for harvesters, PA halls, etc. Unless a bunch of us stop doing what we do, the market will get saturated soon, and demand will trickle away.
There is no solution, simply too many Architects. We're more common that weaponsmiths & Armorsmiths after all, and we're making a product that never decays. Once that need is met, all but 2-5 per server move on, & the market will probably be balanced.
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.
Player cities could literally go to war. To prevent serious personal loss in the event of having your structures "destroyed", have the structure go into a "destroyed" state. When a structure becomes destroyed, it is still in place for 24 hours. The owner of the structure simply goes to the destroyed house, re-deeds it, and it becomes a Deed: Ruined Small Tattoine House, or whatever. Give architects a tool to then convert that deed back into all of the subcomponents that the structure required - the base resources. Ie: A Ruined Small House converts into a small power core, 10 struct mods, & a sm struct storage mod. The arch then adds some resources, & recreates the deed.
This would transform us from a simple churn & sell profession into a vital & integral part of the civil war. The profession would be worth keeping & using even if we AREN'T churning out a PA hall a day. Let's be realistic, even with decay, buildings aren't USEFUL enough to warrant people buying them over & over again every time it decays. We'd become more like a medic. Sure, you could sit at home & craft stimpacks all day long, but there's cooler stuff to do.
(By the by, in case anyone was wondering about the three or four architect estimate I posted earlier: I was assuming the following numbers, which are probably wrong. 5000 players per server * 10% person/month turnover = 50 people per month * 6 major structures/player / 30 days/month = 10 major structures/day. 10 structures/day is within the capabilities of four architects, thanks to the fact that you can buy resources from miners (although not Miners). In fact, two could probably manage it, but I imagine there will be travel and personality issues that make it more difficult. About wrong numbers: 10% turnover/month is probably high.)
I really have no idea on decay... just that I sure would hate to have to replace my harvesters every couple months.. it's just about as expensive moving them every week!
But definitly let us build mine fields, turrets, etc. Stuff that gets blown up and needs replacing.
Oh, how about a % of maintenance paid on things we build goes toour bank acount? 
wishful thinking I know.
Here is my take on what I have seen so far.... I think that decay is not a terrible idea, but nearly impossible to come up with a proper solution. The only realistic thing I can think of are replacing house components, which doesn't sound like a terribly popular idea. That said, the power up idea is just silly. There is no reason for a house to have any sort of powerup. Perhaps the ability to cut the maintenance temporarily would be a very good, and popular idea, however seems very unlikely. On another sort of modular thought line, the inclusion of optional modules to be included in structures during the crafting process. Could range all the way from warehouse modules, to basement modules (in any structure?), to whatever our imaginations come up with. This sort of thing would necessitate a complete redesign of the housing structures, which I don't really think that the Devs are going to be up for. (Not to mention this part is off the topic of this thread, but something worth thinking about)
What I am for, is the inability to move a housing structure. The possibility to sell a stationaryhouse should be properly implemented. I would go with the assumption that harvesters and the like are manufactured with mobility in mind, so they should still be able to be redeeded and moved. Now, the possibility could exist for an architect to redeed/move a structure for someone, as it isn't terribly uncommon for someone to actually move a house. I think this sounds like the best option personally, but I don't know if others would receive this in a positive way.
People have already been selling houses for less than they can sell resources for to make it..What do think someone is going to pay for something that decays or needs constant tweaking so it wont be destroyed..No I dont have and answer for how to fix this skill but I know decay is not it..
This would be another one of those push to make it happen then when it comes into play the same people who wanted it would be crying again..It is the players who sell for next to nothing that ruined it all by taking a good chuck of buyers out early who would have waited till later for thier housing..Plus the fact that this is all speculation and you have no proof that no one will be buying houses down the road..
This thread is not purely for the discussion of decay. The thread is for all thoughts on how to get Architects a renewable source of income.
I posted some ideas on a seperate thread. Take a look.
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=architect&message.id=14473
Rarek wrote:People have already been selling houses for less than they can sell resources for to make it..What do think someone is going to pay for something that decays or needs constant tweaking so it wont be destroyed..No I dont have and answer for how to fix this skill but I know decay is not it..
This is the part of the argument that confuses me. Houses already need "constant tweaking" to avoid destruction - that's what a maintenance payment is. All decay proposals that I've seen have included the idea that decay should be haltable in some way that involves giving money to architects. It's basically the same as the current way that things work, except that somehow the idea that architects make money is included in the loop. The idea that decay doesn't exist in the game right now is not correct, it's just haltable without giving money to architects in any way.
Obviously, none of this applies to harvesters. People will continue to need them even if they decay, so they will continue to be bought.
I'd rather see the profession with long term viability, which is why I'd rather see us have a role in the civil war.