Architect Archive
Thread: Bloop
w33tab1x
Tue Jun 29, 2004 9:32 am
#27
my view is, 10 isnt the right amount for crafters. think about it im a arch i need about 2-3 factroys to get everything done quicker. 1 would take years. you have 3 factroys they take 2 lots each wow then what 1 house great lol. so then we have to buy in all are resources witch could costs a bomb. i recon they leave it or move are lots up up and above.
GogoDodo
Tue Jun 29, 2004 9:35 am
#28
+ it doesn't affect current and new crafters coming in the market (and that's just to name a few)
+we can't disagree with your opinion
Why should some crafters make do with 8 lots while others have 200 or more ?Shouldn't everyone be on the same playing field ? Why can't weALL makedo with 10 lots and 100k stacks ? Isn't 1 house, 2 droids, bank, factory, equipped travel pack enough storage ?
I would think that new crafters would be all for it. It means that more resources are available at a cheaper rate, allowing them to get grinding materials as well as decent resources without having to pay thru the nose for it.
Some crafters stick with 8 lots, and thats fine. Thats their choice. Personally i think they should bring back the miner profession and boost the lots of that profession alone. But your argument can be made against crafters who rent lots from others. Fair play is all well and good, but the whole motivation behind business is being better than the competition. More harvestors means more resources, more resources means lower prices, which leads to more sales, which leads to more money.
I don't think i could be an Arch without a bunch of harvestors at my fingertips.
G
ZenDragonMLS
Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:04 am
#29
This discussion highlights one of the common problems that I see on the forums, and presumably from the developers. People jump to *solutions* without clearly defining the problem.
What *is* the problem with cross-server lots? Is it that the devs didn't think it would happen? Is it that cross-server lots add load to the database? Is it that it reduces the social interaction? Is it that it drives more resources into the system than the system can handle or that drastically change the economy? What *is* the "problem" that this is trying to solve? And if you state one of those as "THE problem", someone should have some actual *FACTS* to back up their problem definition.
Once you've defined the problem, THEN you can look at a range of solutions and assess their cost and benifits.
ESJ178
Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:51 am
#30
Pawlin - great response
Cross server lot trading SHOULD be banned and I applaud the Dev's for their efforts to end it. My wife & I have 2 accounts, we have 1 structure factory and 2 other factories, 1 merchant tent and 2 houses up. This leaves us 11 open lots for her needs as a Combat Medic and mine as an Architect. We both run vendors thus our only efficiency is using the (1) merchant tent. So it is possible to run crafting operations with the allotted lots. And...we do sell our extra resources. But........it isn't always easy for sure, as decisions have to be constantly made as to whether my need for a specific resource is greater than her need at the moment. Or should we not collect for our needs but harvest some uber dolovite which we can resell. It is a constant balancing act. (I was a solecrafter doing this same balancing act before the wife got into the game)
We run across the lot farms and it is upsetting. Why, because of several reasons: (not in any order)
1) The Devs have stated that cross server lot trading wasn't intended and thus isn't part of the game mechanics. We do try and play within the rules of the game....seems to be a way to establish a level playing field so to speak.
2) Its a monopolistic practice which drives the crafter with only a few harvestors out of business. The price of resources are lowered, thus the ability to make extra funds by selling resources to support a crafting game style is diminshed.
3) It largely takes decision making out of the game for someone with vast fields of static harvestors.
4) It artificially increases data base server load on any particular server, thus hindering any hope for the rest of us that perhaps the Dev's might increase # lots per server after reviewing the statistics for db loading vs player population etc.
4) It allows for the lot trader to gather enormous amounts of resources for a specific product type and flood the market with that product again affecting the small crafter or casual player negatively.
Would there be enough resources available if these lot trades were eliminated. My guess, is most certainly as the demand would be balanced by increased resource pricing (as currently happens with meat). However, we won't know for some time as I don't believe the lot trading fix is due for some time yet.
Now I guess I have opened myself up to be flamed but so be it.........
GogoDodo
Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:58 am
#31
2) Its a monopolistic practice which drives the crafter with only a few harvestors out of business. The price of resources are lowered, thus the ability to make extra funds by selling resources to support a crafting game style is diminshed.
Actually in my experience thus far the smaller crafter actually does better cause of this. Since they only have a handful of lots, which they themselves own or contract thru another player, they pull up and move their operation often. They search and find those new spawns of really great resources and pounce upon them, pulling in highly valued material while my static fields are only pulling in some crappy stuff (cause its the highest %).
G
Tunturi
Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:02 pm
#32
Bottom line is lot trading across servers was something the Dev's didnt think about when they allowed people to setup accounts on different servers. They never intended to let people do this, thus the nerf.
People who say they can't run a bussiness on 10 lots is BS. What there really saying is they can't mass produce products on 10 lots, thus not allowing them to flood the market with there products and under cutting other crafters.
Even tho i can't see how the dev's could elimiate cross trading, except if they made it so you could only have 1 account period... and to change servers you would have to delete your existing account...
All i could think is they could make it so you couldnt give admin to other players on your harvesters/factories. This would make it a pain for players since they would have to log into there dummy accounts to put in power/money and to empty the hoppers for there friend. This would get old real quick and would discourage alot of players from doing it...
ZenDragonMLS
Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:15 pm
#33
Tunturi wrote:
People who say they can't run a bussiness on 10 lots is BS. What there really saying is they can't mass produce products on 10 lots, thus not allowing them to flood the market with there products and under cutting other crafters.
As I mentioned, I have 20 lots to play with, and therefore can have 10 of them dedicated to harvesters. I don't "flood the market" and i don't "undercut other crafters". I think that your statement assumes a number of things that aren't necessarily so.
Tunturi
Tue Jun 29, 2004 5:20 pm
#34
ZenDragonMLS said:
As I mentioned, I have 20 lots to play with, and therefore can have 10 of them dedicated to harvesters. I don't "flood the market" and i don't "undercut other crafters". I think that your statement assumes a number of things that aren't necessarily so.
Ok after thinking about pricing, Im wrong about undercutting, bottom line anyone should be able to sell there product for whatever price they want.
But you can still run a bussiness on 10 lots. I'm tired of guys saying they need the extra lots just to stay in bussiness, if they raised there prices some they could still stay in bussiness without needing all the additional harvesters and factories. I still think the real issue is people who want to mass produce items are the ones that want the extra lots to give them a edge over there competition. There should be a fair playing field and lot trading does not allow this...
Tunturi
Tue Jun 29, 2004 5:23 pm
#35
Show me a written rule, anywhere, where the practice is disallowed? I have plenty of commentary in person from CSRs saying it is perfectly legal.
Fivo Asia
If they Dev's think its so great, how come there trying to come up with ways to stop it?
ZenDragonMLS
Tue Jun 29, 2004 5:41 pm
#36
Tunturi wrote:
Show me a written rule, anywhere, where the practice is disallowed? I have plenty of commentary in person from CSRs saying it is perfectly legal.
Fivo Asia
If they Dev's think its so great, how come there trying to come up with ways to stop it?
Obviously I missed something. I've seen a bunch of PLAYERS whining about cross-server lot trades. I guess I need to go look around to find where the DEVS were trying to stop them.
BTW - based on what I've seen so far, it's not clear that the DEVS are always rigorous in their examination of the problems and solutions.
Now - again I'll call for all of you who believe that cross-server lot trades are the spawn of the devil - I posed several questions here. All you have to do is answer them. I'm a system architect - if you show me a real honest-to-goodness problem then I'll help to find a solution. But the first piece of value that I can give you is to assist you in figuring out what your *PROBLEM* is. And so far it looks like a hazy ghost to me.
orange-arrows
Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:06 am
#37
Maybe devs can adjust the spawn mechanic so that new spawns avoid existing harvesting operations. The higher the concentration of harvesters, the lower the concentration of resources spawned beneath them.
No other change to ownership, trading, production, taxation, mainenance, administration, or lot ownership caps would need to be invented. A couple months of that should solve the 'I own ludicrous quantities of harvesters' situation.
Fneegan
Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:20 am
#38
No other change to ownership, trading, production, taxation, mainenance, administration, or lot ownership caps would need to be invented. A couple months of that should solve the 'I own ludicrous quantities of harvesters' situation
I wonder why you think that would help over THESE WE KNOW THAT WILL HELP:
- Havea single owner on a harverster (no other on admin or hopper shares)
- Force harvesters to be RE-DEEDed more frequently by owner
orange-arrows
Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:50 am
#39
I am trying tosuggest the lowest impact solution:
80 harvesters sitting for MONTHS on concentrations that never exceed 6% ... would probably get redeeded or allowed to decay to 0 (in the case of absent or non-existant owners) .... and you aren't 'forcing' change on anyone, you are simply adjusting the game strategy to compensate for (some would say) abusive player strategies. A player could choose to keep his harvesters there, harvesting minimal quantities of possibly excellent resourcs, but I bet the player would decide all on their own that wasn't really working out too well.
Note: I am not really judging the legitamacy of the lot swap/horde situation ... I am simply sayingIF the problem is people own HUGE, STATIC harvester farms ... then forcing them to move them every couple spawns because NOTHING meaningful would spawn for them, seems to solve the issue of STATIC, and because they have to be moved (redeeded and redeployed) it would/could be a major pain for the true owners of the deeds to do that on a regular basis and so would be self-limiting it would then tend to solve the HUGE issue.