Architect Archive
Thread: Decay Poll
Am I reading this wrong or are the pros and cons switched?
Cons:
- Renewable income for architects
- Market will not saturate ensuring continued use for the current volume of Architects
Pros:
- Increased downtime on harvesters - Why?
- Potential increase in costs for ressources
- Increased inconvenience of operating harvesters or structures - Why?
- Inconvenience of having to replace/repair furniture
- Possible decrease in value of structures and furnitureoverall
- Loss of complex displays made with multiple furniture pieces - Why?
/disagree with both
The players are already getting hosed enough as it is. This will just piss them off more and sc rew them over even more.
It's hard for me to say yes/no to structure alone as there are a lot of things that will make decay more valuable, less valuable.
Decay is pointless if experimentation gets fixed. More specifically to the ability of efficiency for harvesters and maintenance rate for houseing. Furniture shouldn't decay at all unless it performs a task other than looking pretty.
I think this poll is rather useless until experimentation is resolved. Let the experimentation problem get fixed one or the other then redo this poll. I'd imagine a lot of opinions would change if experimentation is resolved.
I am abstaining from this vote until experimentation is resolved 
biwan:
/disagree on structures
/disagree on furniture
I've already voted once with this character, but I pay for two so both of my votes should count (and I'm to lazy to log in with the other station name) 
/disagree on structure
/disagree on furniture
Maintanence on Harvesters and Houses are already a pain, and plus PA Halls are a pain in the but, making them more of a pain in the but would be crazy.
Secondly I am a BH I use my house to drop crap in it, other than that a house really serves no purpose for me I harvest part time to supplement my income but it sucks the constant resource shifting and keeping up the maintanence. If this were instituted I would just quit harvesting, not have a house, and make my money from BH missions. Remember architects have to harvest as well, they would only be making it harder for themselves.
/disagree structure
/disagree furniture
too stupid to even think about writing why there would be a good reason for decay
/disagree
No decay should be allowed at all. Furniture shouldn't decay and neither should houses. It will cause players to actually not buy houses, I promise you that. I know a few players that refuse to even buy a large house for 120k, that house won't disappear on them. If you introduce decay, it will totally mess with people, PAs, and people will in general avoid even owning a house anymore.
Furniture decay is even worse. How many people actually USE all their furniture, or regularly have guests coming to use or sit in your furniture? I am betting not many people, and the entire purpose of furniture is to look cool in your house.
Architects who worry about the market filling up too much, and the profession becoming useless, those are the same people who are going to quit Architect soon anyway. The profession has a major resource which is factories and harvesters. Houses and PA halls, sure will probably fill up some day, but then all the Devs have to do is release new schems and floorplans for new house types, and it will change again. Same with furniture.
/disagree and /disagree and I couldn't put it any better than this gentleman.
WarGhul wrote:
/disagree
/disagree
Also, I would like to add, I strongly disagree to the idea of decay in the most vehement manner possible. Especially for harvestors and houses. I think the idea of decay for the rest of that stuff it stupid as well, especially the furniture one (I mean, come on, my mother has had the same couch in her living room for 15 years, it hasn't "decayed") Everyone who is agreeing isa fool,willing tosacrifice the imagination and creativity displayed bythe people who create furniture displays andinnovative housing decorations and even all good will from other players in order to make a few extra FAKE creds. Do you seriously believe that people will purchase heavy harvestors if they decay? Why pay 120,000 credits for anything, when you could purchase a medium for 14K and have it last just as long. Sure it only takes up half the resources, but you'll have to buy a new one after X resource shifts anyway, so why invest in something that costs 10 times more but only produces results that are less than twice as good?
No Decay.
-I AM WARGHUL
-Phal (master archtiect)