Architect Archive
Thread: Proposal Need feedback before submitting
This is not even an issue, let alone a top issue for architects.
Tued the Master Builder
I think 98% of the Architects out there will diagree with you when you say crit failures on structures is not an issue. It may not be an issue to YOU but, to the rest of us it is. Just because YOU enjoy loosing 21000 resources on a crit failure doesn't mean WE enjoy it. Not all of us are a glutten for punishment.
I have no problem with crit failures on items as long as I do not loose subcomponents that I have ALREADY been SUCCESSFUL on creating.
After thinking over what I just posted I came to the conclusion that asking for decay probably isn't the best solution and from a programmers stand point would probably mean a lot of recoding and decoding to even get it setup.
However making experimenting actually count would give us a lot of business. I mean if we have the ablitiy to sell someone a harvester that takes 1/2 the maint and pull up a little more then their current harvester does then people will start paying a lot more money for the good stuff. I would love being able to sell a heavy for 200-300k, /drool. In addition just about everyone would wind up getting new harvesters so thats a huge demand that will at least jump start our market back into extinence. In addition I would love get more furniture and be able to customize. That would give us a lot more stuff to work with because currently you can easily make more money decorating a house then actually selling that same size house, which I think is pretty ironic if you ask me.
Maller Malice
Master Architect begging for us to try to fix our market notour crits for the time being.
First of all, we seem to be forgetting something...
Iam allowed to pick one thing and throw it at the Devs right now, so this is what I came up with
We can throw one issue to the devs, not a bunch of little ones. Second, if they're going to get whatever we ask for in this publish, it's got to be something quick and easy to implement. Asking for decay or experimentation systems is just not going to happen in a week.
As for other classes, there is *one* other class that has the same assembly/experimentation issue and it's Droid Engineer. All the other classes get +100 in both stats.
As for critical failures, I accept that critical failures are a part of the game (I'm pretty sure I said something like that in my first post). I'm certainly not asking for them to be eliminated. What I am asking is for the probability for Architects to be brought in line with all the other classes (minus DE of course) and for the penalty for critical failures to be brought in line with other classes (which the suggestion to only destroy raw materials does). I also stand by the fact that I think it's something that would be easy for the devs to implement as we're not asking for exceptions or specific exclusions for just Architects, it's something that goes in for all the classes and has a clear line of separation.
As much as I would like the idea of reducing the penalty of crafters as we all make our way up the skill tree, I think it muddies the suggestion and we are supposed to already be getting an advantage over those with lower skills through the structure assembly stat.
/aggreed, specialy since they are bound to nerf macroing.
However can you really push for an answer on the tool effectiveness and station effectiveness on crit fail rate and experimentation success rate and resource quality on crit fail rate? This is a huge debate and even if we get nothing done for us on this publish, they can at the very least answer that question which would lead to addressing of the obvious bug or uncoded work yet to be done. It will also tell usif our crafting stations are worth anything at all.
How do you know the sturcture is not already defined in the db?? Do you know that you can experiment on wind generators and get 5k/h instead of 4 right? You do know that factories have efficiency to experiment on but, have a base setting of 0 so that you can't experiment on it?
Most of the code has already been fleshed out, they just need to get it finished. Which is not an overnight thing, but should take a couple weeks to get tested and finished. It's not like they are coding seperate functions for experimentation on each individual item, if they are they need to be taken out back and shot.
Oh and your comment about making experimenting mean something would take too much programming and such and such, thats not true. I mean one everything that we create saves a spot in the database, doesn't matter what, everything saves on the same database, including what you experiment on. So all they have to do is make it where experimenting actually effects the final product of the deed, simply as that. Second the reason why thats is so easy is because if it wasn't do you think they would be easily able to change weaponsmiths, armorsmiths, BEs, and medics stuff all the time. I mean like every patch they change something so when they experiment it makes a better product. We all use the same databases for everything so its really a simply programming correction. Why else do you think it was so easy for them to all of a sudden have crafting stations with a rating, know one knows if they do anything but they created a market for high quality crafting stations because everyone would rather be safe then sorry.
Why else do you think it was so easy for them to all of a sudden have crafting stations with a rating, know one knows if they do anything but they created a market for high quality crafting stations because everyone would rather be safe then sorry.
Just a quick point, if I had to guess (and that's all we can do in these cases), I'd say that the rating you are referring to was already there, they just made it show up in the examine window. The higher quality stations were most likely already there, we just didn't see the stat.
Alright I think the feedback here is pretty good. I have incorporated your suggestions and am "unstickying it". I doubt that we'll get this implemented in the upcoming patch as it has already been pushed to TC, and that many classes didn't get the love they wanted, but I guess that's just how it is.
The next issue I'll be addressing will be experimentation. Furniture variety and customization is non debatable because it's simple: We want it, and it's (more or less)easy to to do... No two ways about it.
Ill also be upgrading our "issues" list once Im done looking at the experimentation.
Thanks for everything
And tib...
If none of the other professions have trouble then theres no point in them wasting countless weeks try to set up a completely revised program to run the architect professoin just so we wouldn't lose components because we all shot ourselves in the foot by selling so low and not making enough to recounter crits.
First, no one's saying that the architects should have a different crit system. All crafters should have the same system no matter what (and I'd be that's what the devs think too).
Second, for someone who claims to have so much experience in programming, you're grossly miss-estimating the time involved in a fix like this. In plain english, the current system most likely looks like this...
ingredients stored in array
calculate whether to crit fail (based on random number * some sort of probability factor)
If !critical_fail then
go to next step of crafting stage
else
loop through ingredient array
destory item
All they'd need to do to change it to not destroy the subcomponents is a minor change to the code:
ingredients stored in array
calculate whether to crit fail (based on random number * some sort of probability factor)
If !critical_fail then
go to next step of crafting stage
else
loop through ingredient array
ifsome item property = subcomponent then
return item to inventory
else
destory item
Now this is obviously shorthand, but there's no way there's weeks of work in there unless they've got different functions for each crafter type and/or the worst spaghetti code in history.
/Agree with reservation.
As a professional negotiator I have always learned to ask for more then you expect and be ready to have a fall back position. This should be your fall back position. What else would you add to this?
Perhaps experimentation. Turn it on. The code is there.
Theodis Darkstar
Master Architect NHoC
Kaadara, Naboo 5260 6060
Corbantis