Architect Archive

Just a quick thought.... Whyare there SKILL TAPES in the game???

To boost stats perhaps?

---

Dvnce wrote:

...What really needs to happen to make it more of an apprentice situation is there needs to be ingrediants that are non-expirementable for each craft.... that are ingredients to master products.. Archs are lucky they can build walls and turbines and sell those.. where as most of your other craft professions dont have that option..

---

Yep, what he said.

---

Dvnce wrote:

[snip] Each craft have items that provide decent exp and provide a decent income to support your grind..Arch have houses.. AS hasstarter armor and WS have starter weapons.. (and so on) It is not suppose to be easy to reap the benifits of your craft .. There are alot of players out there to sell too.. and plenty will grow in what they can afford as you grow in what you can provide..[snip]

---

---

Dvnce wrote:

What really needs to happen to make it more of an apprentice situation is there needs to be ingrediants that are non-expirementable for each craft.... that are ingredients to master products.. Archs are lucky they can build walls and turbines and sell those.. where as most of your other craft professions dont have that option..

Message Edited by Dvnce on 03-29-2004 10:14 AM

---

And in order for that to happen we need the economy to function (read flow) properly.It dosen't of course, we are plauged by empty vendors, anda components market is virtually unknown. This is one of my favorite causes:

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=droid_engineer&message.id=65004#M65004

---

BoberFett wrote:

---

Dvnce wrote:

[snip] Each craft have items that provide decent exp and provide a decent income to support your grind..Arch have houses.. AS hasstarter armor and WS have starter weapons.. (and so on) It is not suppose to be easy to reap the benifits of your craft .. There are alot of players out there to sell too.. and plenty will grow in what they can afford as you grow in what you can provide..[snip]

---

I don't see it. There's not much of a market for junky D18s. I don't see too many peoplein Mabari armor. And who buys an MSE or a gnort with 50 HAM? There's little incentive to do anything but grind. Architects are the exception to the rule.

---

hmm .. I was able to make pretty decent Non CH pets on my grind through BE.. And I know quite a few people that will by junky guns to slice through for smuggling.. Yeah its tuff to find the income to support the grind .... But it is not impossible..

As Far as the componants market.. We have a componants and resource Mall in our city on Gorath .. .. that is all you will find there.. and the componants seem to do good... (of course I tend to buy all the walls that show up there..) But what makes it tuff .. From what I undersand of the AS and WS(which bottem line is what the majority of people that present this argument( and that is changing)are coming from) every componant has to be exp. on.. You make a generic Item .. (like our walls) for each profession and then I think you will see legit Componant markets flourish..

---

LadyGrey wrote:

Actually, there is another way this could be approached. Keep the system as it is, but allow the lower-level items to be made "perfect" with just a few experimentation points. If you are given the ability to make something, then at that level you should be able to make it just as well as a master could.

If I was apprenticed to a master crafter (ala Real Life), and I was assigned to make some widget that would be a component in something else, or be a stand-alone item, then I would be expected to make it as close to perfect as possible. I might have a few more critical failures than someone more advanced. If something is of a low complexity, then it should only take a few experimentation points to make it completely right. So maybe experimentation should be linked to complexity, with more complex items requiring more experimentation points.

It's a moot point, since the devs never ever implement anything that is brought up in the forums. Actually, I wonder if they outsourced the code for doing crafting, items and vendors. Maybe that's why the current devs don't seem to be able to change one part of the code without messing something else up.

---

I agree with this...but maybe they can make it 3/4 of the way there, because even though you would try to be perfect......untill you are considered a master, it will not be completely perfect. For instance: instead of being able to make a BER 10 MMI, they would be able to make a BER 8 (7.5 rounded) before they reach master.

As someone (Pawlin I think) mentioned in another thread, when we have these discussions about "solutions" we end up talking a lot but not really coming to any conclusions, because we haven't clarified the *goals* that we want to achieve.

I've seen (in this and other threads) a number of implicit goals that different people hold, and that might be in conflict. If we all come to the discussion not agreeing on the goals, then we end up fighting about the solutions as a stand-in for the deeper goal discussion.

Step back a minute and forget the solution(s). What are the goals that we are trying to achieve?

Possible goals:
1. Provide a way for novice crafters to stay afloat economically as they progress toward mastery of the craft.
2. Provide a clear distinction between goods made by a novice and those made by a master so as to motivate people to continue on toward mastery.
3. Discourage "dabbling" in multiple professions such that someone can "cherry-pick" the most lucritive portions of several crafting trees.

I'm sure that there are other goals (*independent of implementation*) that people could postulate.

I think that those (and others) are pretty fundamental to the design process here. For example, looking just at #1, perhaps the designers *want* people working their way up toward mastery to have to subsidize that path through other means. Think about people waiting tables and washing dishes while they go to school. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that, I'm just saying that your position on #1 will drive your judgement on any proposal like this.

I admit that I haven't read much of the developers stuff yet so I don't know if they have articulated their positions on these goals. If they have, and you disagree with them, realistically you won't have much chance of proposing solutions that conflict with those goals. OTOH if your goals match the developers, and you want to show a solution that improves their ability to achieve those goals, then you might find a more fertile ground for your solution.

Here's a radical idea, I have not thought this through to it's ultimate conclusion, but maybe it could work.

If the idea is to give lower level crafters some 'participation' while working up to Master then how about giving out some schematics that are only available at a certain level? No really big stuff of course, but more of an 'apprentice only' item. This would keep some rarity value for these items and give an exclusive market for lower levels.

An example completely off the top of my head, so maybe not the best example that could be given, but netherless I will give it here so you can see where I am coming from:

at Furniture I - playergains the ability to craft a Futon
at Furniture II - player gains the ability to craft a small bed and retains the ability to craft a Futon
at Furniture III - player gains the ability to craft a large bed and retains the ability to craft a small bed, but loses the ability to craft a Futon

Instead of the situation where the master can't be bothered to make item x, he can't make it at all, so if you want one you HAVE to go to an apprentice.

Probably a crap idea, I am just thinking outside the box, hopefully this thought could generate some better ideas.