Architect Archive

alright, for the sake of arguement, lets say its useless. Experimentation could (and should) beintroduced on other aspets of the structure - more efficient harvesters (less maintenance and/or less power usage), different rates of extraction (although I read somewhere the devs wre not favorable to this, too bad), and perhaps others. Perhaps even the shifts could be lengthened, as many have called for this, so that capacity can mean something again.

The point of the post was to give architects something back on what they sell and produce. Is this a bad thing? I would think not. It can be instituted now under the current situation, but it should be utilized where experimentation matters as well. Thats all I'm saying.

I seriously doubt that .. for my heavies, a full day is already 4320 creds. increasing this by a few creds, say 40 creds (just under 1%) is a drop in the bucket compared to having my harvester decay and buying another one. I go through the same architect for my harvesters, so she would be pulling in 400 creds per any given day that my harvesters are in the field. As she has a lot of business, I would expect it to not be unreasonable that she could be drawing an average of 4000 creds a day (and this is probably very conservative). And this isn't a welfare system - it rewards architects who are making items and successfully marketing and selling their products. A welfare system implies a free handout - this is a reward, like a royalty - for continuing use of their product (like a monthly subscription fee tp SWG

The reward I want is making a useful item and selling it, plain and simple. Percentages of maintence would not make architect items any more sellable than they are today, it would not increase the ever declining market that is available once everyone has all the harvesters they need. It would lower the price that some architects sell their harvesters at in order to increase those architects "commision" making being an architect an even more price competative low baller market.

And yes it is welfare if the architects are the only profession that are given free cash handouts for doing nothing more than they should already be doing, why doesn't the weaponsmith get a kickback from every mission that a fighter runs while using their guns? Why doesn't the droid engineer get a kickback from every BH mission that uses their seekers, why doesn't the medical crafter get a kickback for ever wound healed? Why because all those professions have a continuing market base.

they get it because architects are in trouble, not the other crafting classes (well, DE's are debatable, but they have a fix coming)

look, irritating your customer base will not help you - this means forcing non-architects to buy new structures every so often that they are already pay maintenance costs is extremely frustrating. If this happens, I personally will just stop using harvesters and house and factories all together and switch my professional line to not need it. If this scheme is implemented architects will do nothing but hurt themselves in the long run, and the game will be worse off, as architects continue to die off, and professional lines dependent on structures will die off as well.

Remember, this is a world where weapons and armor are the high sellers, not structures because your character doesn't need shelter. What the architects need is a stream of revenue for a set amount of time off their products, as well as new products lines to keep making your class viable.

Threatening to never buy from architects again has little effect in the day and age of no decay, no need for you to buy more now so why would not buying more in the future if decay is placed change anything?

If you actually read the threads about decay not the poll that's so totally sqewed by folks such as yourself that run to the main boards crying look what the mean old architects are talking about. You will see that total decay is not the only option nor is it the most popular. This does not indicate a group of people looking to piss anyone off it indicates a group of people that are trying to come up with a workable solution for everyone.

This is my last reply to you on the subject you obviously have no idea about architect issues if you still believe this is about money. Your post indicates you are not a crafter and therefore you really don't know what crafters (which are the people that would be most effected by an industrial decay) find acceptable.

Saying oh poor architects lets throw them some money and maybe they will go away is not the solution. Post a solution that lets us continue to do our craft and lets you remain making more money off of the items we create than we will ever see or hope to see and then maybe we can have a discussion.

I disagree that architects should get part of pay mantenance, what ewe need is a recurring need for prroducts. Our items should decay, in fact every craftable itme in the game should decay at some rate.

And yes the threats are totally laughable.

I agree something needs to be done with your profession to make it viable in the long run, but introducing a further burden on all players who purchase items from an architect is not viable, long-term solution.

You cannot compare purchasing weapons and armor with having to repurchase a house, and all the headache that it entails. Purchasing weapons and armor, while not a fun thing to do, is relatively harmless compared to introducing structure decay on my house. If I were to follow that to its logical conclusion, I'd have to:

1) purchase a new house,
2) move all the items/furniture out of my original house,
3) store those items *someplace*
4) destroy the old house,
5) hope to God that I can plunk down my new house in the same location,
6) move all those items/furniture to the new house.

If house structure decay is introduced, I will not purchase another house. Nor will I purchase another architect-crafted item again. The whole concept of architect will become worthless to me, and perhaps others as well.

More creativity is required here in order to repair or enhance your profession. Burdening other players with your professions' problems is not the solution. This game is already tedious and cumbersome enough without introducing more of the same. I already have to log in to pay bills and taxes in-game (maintenance, etc.) and I have that in real life as well. We don't any need more it here in-game.

---

Berratus wrote:
I agree something needs to be done with your profession to make it viable in the long run, but introducing a further burden on all players who purchase items from an architect is not viable, long-term solution.

You cannot compare purchasing weapons and armor with having to repurchase a house, and all the headache that it entails. Purchasing weapons and armor, while not a fun thing to do, is relatively harmless compared to introducing structure decay on my house. If I were to follow that to its logical conclusion, I'd have to:

1) purchase a new house,
2) move all the items/furniture out of my original house,
3) store those items *someplace*
4) destroy the old house,
5) hope to God that I can plunk down my new house in the same location,
6) move all those items/furniture to the new house.

If house structure decay is introduced, I will not purchase another house. Nor will I purchase another architect-crafted item again. The whole concept of architect will become worthless to me, and perhaps others as well.

More creativity is required here in order to repair or enhance your profession. Burdening other players with your professions' problems is not the solution. This game is already tedious and cumbersome enough without introducing more of the same. I already have to log in to pay bills and taxes in-game (maintenance, etc.) and I have that in real life as well. We don't any need more it here in-game.

---

Read the actual posts about decay and not jump to conclusions about what we want or how we want to implament it. Total decay on housing is very low on the architect suggestions lists.

Maintenance kickbacks were shot down in these forums long ago. There were roundly agreed upon, even amongst those of us who never seem to see eye to eye, as a terrible idea.

Hell, people would give things away, just to have people use them. It's like Strongbad's Book cost: Cheap as Free!

I'm also not worried about "well, we'll all just quit mining then". That's pretty unlikely. Aspeople have corretly pointed out,this game is built around combat. That means weapons and armor are the big sellers. Can't produce too many of those without mining. I just don't see a lot of Master Weaponsmiths sitting out in a field, sampling resources for thier next run of parts in the factory that they apparently don't own because they boycotted structures.....

What they *really* need to do, besides the obvious and oft-mentioned recurring demand, is give some type of reason to own a home. Give me a benefit. Heck, put on a restriction...

if player.ownshouse = false then

allowToPlaceMedOrLargeHarvester = "no"

end if

How fun that would be. You would obviously have to let people put personal ones up either way. This isn't a very researched idea, but it's a much better alternative than maintenance fee cuts going to Archis. But seriously, give me a tangible benefit for owning a home. Maybe sitting inside of it very, very, very slowly heals some wounds or something. Give people something for their trouble and maint, besides having something to show off...

acer

---

Ndainye wrote:

---

---

Read the actual posts about decay and not jump to conclusions about what we want or how we want to implament it. Total decay on housing is very low on the architect suggestions lists.

---

...or you could make some statement or point to a set of posts to address your point. I've viewed many posts on this subject and have yet to see/read a coherent, well thought out plan for introducing this.

Incidentally, I hope you're right about house decay being low on your professions' list. From what I've read though, that doesn't seem to be the case.

It should be high on everyones profesion list, for every craftable item.

/bump This might be a decent alternitive to house/pa decay. Housing takes so many resources to begine with that having to make a whole new structure can be prohibitivly exspensive.

I don't agree with this for few reasons.

1.) The % would have to be real real low. Say you sold 10 heavy harvesters that take 2000 credits a day. They run for a week, that is 140K paid in maintenance. Now give 1 % of that to an acrhcitect thats 1400 credits a week. Yeah so i can sneeze 1400. Ok now you have been in business for while you have sold 250 heavies thats 3.5 mil a week in maintenance the Architect gets 35K a week for doing nothing, thats a little better. This number will keep growing and growing. Sure some items will no longer get used but they will keep being replaced.

2.) IMO and I am not an economics major but in the "CURRENT" (I don't care what is fixed or being worked on on test, it is not fixed on live so it doesn't help me in the slightest) state of the game this is going to hurt Architects even more. We have hard enough time with lowballers hurnting our profit margins. This will compund the situation. You will have some people that are in the mindset of if I invest some money and take my profits and put them all into resuorce gathering I can eventually GIVE AWAY enough structures, harvesters, crafting stations etc that I will never have to worry about money again my entire life in SWG. Granted there are only a % of people that would even consider doing something like this.

3.) No one in my opinion should be given "free money" for essentially doing nothing. With the exception of player city taxes because well, thats how cities run. You should work for the money you make.

I appreciate alternative thoughts and ideas, i am not a full supporter of decay myself. But I dont agree with this idea. I have posted several other alternatives as well that I just dont feel like reposting. You can look up some of my posts under my profile if your interestred.

Kindly - Reeka Oxa