Architect Archive
Thread: Question # 2
I would just like to say here and now that MY reason for wanting us to post the question was threefold, each part being equally important in my opinion.
1. I am interested in how these are actually supposed to be working, I have a 45.0 station that I use, it gives inferior results to my 42.7. It shouldn't. I want to sell the best, if 43+ is not better than -10 then why make them at all.
B. Furthermore if the question was worth asking in the first place it should be worth answering, it hasn't been answered.
iii). If we accept a vague answer to our first question, no matter if the question is significant or not, we set the scene for future question/answer sessions. We simply cannot accept this, we need TH and his cronies to understand that when we ask a question we DEMAND a comprehensive and accurate answer.
LonelyGhost wrote:
...this is something TH said in the latest "19 Questions" thread addressed to SL....
...Developers believe that “figuring the numbers” is something that is fun for many players ...
Bandola wrote:
iii). If we accept a vague answer to our first question, no matter if the question is significant or not, we set the scene for future question/answer sessions. We simply cannot accept this, we need TH and his cronies to understand that when we ask a question we DEMAND a comprehensive and accurate answer.
I totally agree with this.
It's like if you ask someone "Could you please tell me what time is it?" and he answers you "Yes, I could" 
Furthermore, I'd like to know if I can expect the same crafting results when using my +43 station at my lab, when using the 0.0 public station at Anchorhead or when using my R2 crafting unit in the middle of the desert.
VWBugKing wrote:
I'm going to have to disagree about asking about Crafting Stations/Tools. Even if we were supplied with a formula that proved a 43.5 turned out to have 1% less critical failures, and 5% better chance of success on experimentation over a 10.0 Crafting Station, would any of us change our prices? About 90% of us already use very high FR Crafting Stations/Crafting Tools, so why do we care? Just to make another 1000 credits because you have a 43.5? That will last a whole 2 weeks while everyone is searching for the 43.5 FR ones. Once every guild/player city has a 43.5, then our sells will go back to nothing. I make more in 2 days worth of Furniture Sales then I have made selling crafting stations my entire career as an Architect. I would would rather ask a question about Furniture Colorization more then Crafting Stations. Atleast that gives us a somewhat steady market of Furniture. I have 5 members of my guild that redesign their house every two months, imaginehow often they woulddo itif they could change colors on furniture.
My two cents.
/clap
Exactly. The question we ask should be something that directly affects our portion of the economy. More structures, more furniture, decay on structures, add ons to the Arch profession to give us a reoccuring economy that don't involve selling candles and lamps.
G
Bandola wrote:
I would just like to say here and now that MY reason for wanting us to post the question was threefold, each part being equally important in my opinion.
[snip]
iii). If we accept a vague answer to our first question, no matter if the question is significant or not, we set the scene for future question/answer sessions. We simply cannot accept this, we need TH and his cronies to understand that when we ask a question we DEMAND a comprehensive and accurate answer.
More than anything else, this drives me. Allowing them to get away with "Science equal Magic - so go away now" really irks me to the core.
Fivo Asia
Bandola wrote:
iii). If we accept a vague answer to our first question, no matter if the question is significant or not, we set the scene for future question/answer sessions. We simply cannot accept this, we need TH and his cronies to understand that when we ask a question we DEMAND a comprehensive and accurate answer.
/disagree
I know players don’t like this but we are not here to make a moral point, nor is there ANY chance that we are going to teach TH a lesson here. As TH has said:
I know there are people looking for specific numbers, but as a general rule, you will almost never see me post the numbers. Developers believe that figuring the numbers is something that is fun for many players and that revealing the numbers is like a magician revealing his secret and that it takes some of the fun out of game play. Unless there is an important and specific need to post a raw number or formula on an issue, we wont cite numbers.
That is the only answer we are ever going to get. NO MATTER HOW CLEVER THE QUESTION OR HOW MANY TIME WE ASK. Let’s move on.
I personally favor asking about furniture. The question should be worded to get as constructive an answer as possible.
Allowing players to craft furniture that can already be found in NPC houses (including rugs and paintings) and creating completely new furniture designs, does not appear (to us) to require very much programming time, nor would it affect game play, butit would be a simple way to increase content. Is it possible to have some (or even one) new piece(s) of furniture included in each publish and mini-publish?
"Will architects be able to craft GCW buildings when the GCW revamp is live? Answer by Yes or No. If yes, examples of what the architects will be able to craft is wanted. If no, an explanation of why not, and what we will be able to do in our role in the GCW instead"
Or, if anyone can phrase it better
zekedog wrote:
I would like to know when ore mining units will be available in crates. I hate carrying around 20 of them when i can carry around 2 crates of 10.
Bug fixes. Why should we use time on bug fixes. We should enhance the proffesion. I see many proffs use time on that. Send a bug report and then nag on it if it takes time.
Further I'd like to know about what new structures we can expect to see. But as they couldnt answer our last I agree with most here to AGAIN ask how muchtools and stations impact crafting. Its such a shame we gotta ask the same friggen question... bleh! Waste of time....
Or, "When will we be able to experiment on houses and certain funiture items to increase the number of items it can store above the current caps or give the funiture the ability to hold an experimented number of items that don't count agains the total house item count?"
Or, very simple. "When will factories crate items to a thousand and resources stack to a million?" No, "please do this for us." or "we would really appreciate this." They know it's a reasonable step towards less database load and a step in the right direction as far as storage is concerned.
Or, if we're doing one step at a time, "When will factory experimentation have an effect on how much the factory can store, how quickly it can make items, and how quickly it uses up maintence and power?"
"If you want a money sink, why not create an architect craftable machine (or even add this functionality into one of the existing architect terminals, since they serve no function at this time) that can be placed in a player city which charges a fee to combine multiple crates, split crates, or items already taken from the crate with identical serial numbers into one large crate which can contain up to the 1k schematic limit?"
Some day I'd like to know when voting terminals will actually work and if the other terminals will ever serve a purpose. Making the architect terminals work in conjunction with the new DE droids would be neat. In example, you can use your terminal in conjunction with your structure maintence droid, you can use it to maintain any structure you have admin on, as opposed to only those on your lots. Another handy use would be a locator terminal that you could use to find any structure that you're an admin on. All the furniture, especially terminals and things that seem like they should be something that can store stuff seriously needs a revamp, but there are more pressing things that need to be adressed first.
Somebody mentioned earlier in the thread that we should focus on things to add and we shouldn't waste time on bugs. The problem is that bugs are a huge issue for everyone, and I think most of us would rather see major bugs and things that experimentation should have an effect on taken care of first. I'd rather work for adding things to a working profession than adding more bugged things to a bugged profession, wouldn't you?
Here's another one:
When will we actually be ARCHITECTS instead of Construction Engineers?
We don't DESIGN anything, we just build it. If you look at what an Architect is SUPPOSED to do, we're not even close to it. How many things do we actually DESIGN? NONE. We should be able to design houses with different walls, doors, and such. We should be able to desing all of our buildings that way. I'm sure it would be tons of trouble, because it would require special coding for each different type of house, but hell, if we're going to wear a tag and be called an architect, then we should rightly be one.