Architect Archive
Thread: Resource Miners = Bantha poo-do
Seneardon wrote:
Sorry if anyone missed the point...it was a joke. I am primarily a resource miner for gods sake lol =p Even said so hehe. Just some of the complaints i hear from some miners who never want to spend another credit after they buy the equipment strike me as a bit simplistic, selfish, and knee-jerk lol.
But not jokingly, I just bought 16 heavies less than 2 weeks ago. I shouldn't have to replace them already. And I do pay maintenance everyday on these bad boys, my gripe is with paying an architech that should have experimented and use good materials top price to only find that I have to re-pay for what should have been done anyway. (which is a moot point if they nerf everything pre-path to a set standard anyway.
I bet you won't find many architechs willing to trade me the defunct 16 I just bought for 16 good ones though. Hmmm...
...Reading comprehension is a beautiful thing. I suggest some of you look into it before attacking one small part of a post lol. I am a resource miner Einstein. I manage 40 odd lotts. I hardly sell in ammounts less then 100k, and mostly only ore. What gets my panties in a bunch is having to unload x ammounts of objects from a store room, not the price. This is a peave, like people who dont signal before making a lane change.Dont lecture me about supply and demand, or the profitability of the archetecture proffesion...I know, I understand, and thats not my point. What was my point? A light hearted rant about minor things that bug me hehe. Let me add one to the list: Self righteus board posters who never miss the opportunity to, in their own minds, lay the smack of edumication on people who dont need edumicating =p
Ohh and FYI, Architects deserve to have a viable class. Its a sick and sad gaming world if the only people who can afford to be an architect are people with a huge cashflow outside the proffesion. Ironic that I, who used to stew over all the hard earned credits those greedy old architects were milking me for, find myself in the position where i have to deffend this simple proposition; architects deserveto make a creditplying their chosen proffesion.I propose this...the next nostradumbass whose smug little response to any legitimate concerns architects might have is "Should have been a weapon smith duder" needs to have a starship dropped on their house, and chubbas trained into their parlor. Sounds fair to me =)
Seneardon wrote:
...Reading comprehension is a beautiful thing.
LoL got that right... so many responses on this board (read flames) are because someone didn't have the comprehension to read what the post said... sadly humor posts like this are the most often misread..
ta-ta
Always wear a FLAMEPROOF SUIT when posting....
ChunkOfCheddar wrote:
Actually I don't think tigris has a valid point. You paid x amount for 16 heavies that would extract at 7kg/h. You still have 16 heavies that extract at 7kg/h. They definitely aren't useless - you're still pulling lots of resources out of the ground for really cheap. Does it really make that much of a difference that you're resources cost .5cpu instead of .4?
Whatsucks isthat there was no prior warning that this change was going into effect - you'd probably rather pay more for top of the line heavies today or less for mediums that are just as good (minus hopper size) - but I don't think getting those heavy harvesters upgraded for free is a reasonable expectation. Especially since us architects were just as surprised (if not more so) than you were by the changes.
I look at things as more than just current ability. Take cars. If we rated car value only on whether they ran and what options they had that would be one thing, but we also rate them on asthetics and age, regardless of condition. Resale value is like that. While I do not think that a harvestor should keep a 100% value off the floor once used, mine just went from 130k to 0 in a mere day. I cannot sell these when someone else is selling a superior medium that consumes less while producing more and at a lower price than me. That means I lose the 2 million credits I just sunk into them by default. Can I still use them, yes. But it makes everything I do cost more than someone using the upgraded versions. While I can still make a profit, I will be unable to compete in a market before long because of dwindling profit, higher upkeeps, and smaller inventory. So, either I upgrade or I try and make do. I like cars, so another analogy. I walked into a exotic car dealership, slapped down 2 mil on a rare McLauren F1, took it home and 2 weeks later I found out that I got a kit car that doesn't perform close to what was expected, the value is less than a 1980Yugo and the dealer has a no return policy. I only hope this would make you upset as it did me??
Tigris, the second analogy isn't a good one.... you got exactly what you expected to get.... a heavy harvester pulling at 7 kg/hour.... it may no longer be the ferrari, but hey, tomorrow there may be something better than the ferrari... does that mean the guy who paid 2 million for his ferrari today got gipped? not really.
I do think its sad we got no notice and thus this type of thing has happened to many people. But you got what you paid for, whether you're now happy with it or not is an entirely different issue.
Ropock - it's worse than the ferrari situation.
Mediums cost 720 credits and 600 power per day less than heavies. If new mediums extract at 7 (I made one just to see), then you waste ~1320 credits per day running a heavy. In about 2 weeks it would make more sense to buy a new medium for 20kand destroy your old heavy because you'd save the cost of the new medium that quickly.
IMHO owning something that just became stupid to use is just cause for complaint, regardless of how much money the person has made in the past.
Turning all the best harvesters in the game into worthless trash was a verybad idea.
well, first off Gris, I was simply talking about the analogy.
second... nothing has been said that these are the final numbers... in fact i think its likely these will all be adjust downward... not just fusions.
third... call it what you want, but the variance in cost is about .1 per resource pulled.... its hardly significant in difference at cost...
now... you have to have more cash on hand to maintain them and sure, it makes sense to upgrade.... but it certainly isn't required... if you were making a profit before the patch, you'll still make a profit after the patch... I just don't see this having a significant impact on resource cost anytime in the near future.
Ropock wrote:
Tigris, the second analogy isn't a good one.... you got exactly what you expected to get.... a heavy harvester pulling at 7 kg/hour.... it may no longer be the ferrari, but hey, tomorrow there may be something better than the ferrari... does that mean the guy who paid 2 million for his ferrari today got gipped? not really.
I do think its sad we got no notice and thus this type of thing has happened to many people. But you got what you paid for, whether you're now happy with it or not is an entirely different issue.
I did not get what I expected, not even close.
What I expected to get was a harvestor that pulled at the maximum rate (since there was only light, medium and heavy) and instead got something that was closer to a medium. I did not buy into heavies because they produced 7kg/hour, I bought them because they were the best, the most efficient, and the most profitable. What I got was none of the above.
Now in Ferrari's, there may be a better one tomorrow, but a) the Ferrari won't lose 100% of it's value automatically and b) the system we had did not allow for a better Ferrari. Changing the rules midstream isn't exactly the same thing.
Sorry if I'm a bit touchy about it but people generally think I'm insane for charging 10k for a medium harvester. They say "wow that's expensive. I'll get back to you". Yeah right. In order for me to pay for my harvesters I have to sell half the resources I mine on the bazaar because I don't really get any takers at 3cpu for buildings.
And just so you know, I had to build a new house last night because a passing starship mysteriously crashed onto my original one, leaving ita smoking crater in the ground. When I got back from the cloning center (I was in the house at the time) I discovered that a band of Jawas had stolen all of the experimented Light Ore Mining Units out of my mineral mining installations. I went to chase them down to recover the missing parts only to have them hop into their sand crawler and run me over with it, killing me again. So I'll be holding you personally responsible for the original starship crash which started the chain of events, and I'll be waiting for my 100 billion credit settlement. <grin>
LordTigris wrote:
I did not get what I expected, not even close.
What I expected to get was a harvestor that pulled at the maximum rate (since there was only light, medium and heavy) and instead got something that was closer to a medium. I did not buy into heavies because they produced 7kg/hour, I bought them because they were the best, the most efficient, and the most profitable. What I got was none of the above.
Now in Ferrari's, there may be a better one tomorrow, but a) the Ferrari won't lose 100% of it's value automatically and b) the system we had did not allow for a better Ferrari. Changing the rules midstream isn't exactly the same thing.
Just because it's not what you expected or wanteddoesn't mean it's worthless. Continuing the car analogy, it feels about the same when auto makers upgrade cars significantly over a short time. Take for example the 2001 Cobra. 320 hp. They didn't make a 2002, but the 2003 now has 390 hp. Makes people who bought 2001 Cobras feel kinda stupid. The 2003 is MUCH faster. But in the end, the 2001 is not worthless, regardless of what your expectations were when you paid for it.
Anyway, sorry to hear about your Ferrari. =)
Ropock - it's worse than the ferrari situation.
Mediums cost 720 credits and 600 power per day less than heavies. If new mediums extract at 7 (I made one just to see), then you waste ~1320 credits per day running a heavy. In about 2 weeks it would make more sense to buy a new medium for 20kand destroy your old heavy because you'd save the cost of the new medium that quickly.
IMHO owning something that just became stupid to use is just cause for complaint, regardless of how much money the person has made in the past.
Turning all the best harvesters in the game into worthless trash was a verybad idea.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trash? My high-maintenance heavies and old economic model work just fine, thank you. Really, thanks a million. Upgrade? 30% better extraction rate is nothing to sneeze at, but I'll get to it if I get to it.
My wife is high-maintenance too, but I keep her around.
And right there Megatroid hit it.... the old economic business model still works.... you paid xxx for a machine that gets you xxx. You got what you paid for. period. You can argue all you want, but you can't say you got ripped off, or that you threw your money away. When you purchased them you got the best that was out there. They will run that way forever (unlike the ferrari).
Look, I agree, changing the rules midstream sucks. Its upsetting to have spent a lot of money only to find out that now there's something better. But realistically this happens every day to everyone.
You want to use a good analogy? use computers.... i can go out and spend $3000 today to get a topend machine that has all the goodies.... in a month its highly likely that there will be something better out there and i can't resell my computer for the $3000 I paid for it. I probly would be lucky to get 1/2 that on the secondary market.