Architect Archive
Thread: Decay Poll
/disagree to both
Why: Decay means that eventually, no matter what, you will have to replace the building. In the real world, if you maintain a building, it will pretty much last forever. You will never have to move your stuff out, tear it down and rebuild.
Now, people are going to say: How will we make money etc!
Well how about this: Make faction harvesters attackable.
First: Make the faction symbol show up ONLY if an overt member of a faction placed it, or if the player goes overt After the harvester is in place. Then make it destroyable like a lair.
Second: Create slightly more effiicient harvetsers that are available via the faction only. say, 3, 5, 9. THese would always be attackable.
This would make sense since the best way to hurt an enemy would be to cut off his supplies. IT would also make the need for defensive fortifications higher.
/agree on both!
Make a repair tool for them and that would solve some of the problems. We have repair tools for other item like weapons, clothing, and droids. Why not for the structure? This repair kit would be made by an Achitect with some uper levels like Installation III or Building III or even use the Constution levels for them. The kits will have like 1 to 3 uses: 1 for the small ones and 3 for the large ones. This would solve the some of the problems we Architects have. One the redeeding issue, I think this would be a good thing if the number was increased somewhat and could be repaired by the repair kit. Like if the max redeed is 10 for a small harvester, then a repair kit would give you one more or if it was a good repair kit 2 or even up to 5 new redeedings. We use repair kits with weapons all the time to same that pistol or carbin that we payed up to 100,000 credits for. Why not the same thing for structures? Anyway, I agree with decay!
Surefoot-SOK wrote:
It's kind of unfair to ask us if we want decay and at the same time tell us we can't choose what kind of decay we want.
I agree. A simple yes or no here isn't a good way to get feedback on this one.
I am for decay on harvestors but not on houses or furniture. How do I answer then?
/agree
I strongly agree with both furniture and structure decay.
P.S. I seriously doubt that people will not buy houses if they have decay. They always need storage. They want a pimping pad. They will come back to us time and time again at the same price we offer because we set the price.
If this poll was in any forum other than architect it would, of course, be voted down. I understand that architects want decay, it makes you more valuable (and let's face it, that's the only real "pro" you care about). I do, however, agree that there should be a decay on structures. A VERY SLOW DECAY, and during that decay, the furniture/structure slowly degrades in appearance. This way, you only have to upgrade your furniture/structure if you REALLY care about the look of it, otherwise, you live in a slum. This gives people a CHOICE rather than FORCING them to pay you lots of money frequently.
Choice: Live ina slummy looking dump, or live in a palace of shiny, clean furniture. Decay should be introduced, but it shouldn't FORCE players to have yet another thing to monitor and stress out about when they go away for the weekend (wondering, did I pay up my harvesters, factories, energy generators, houses, AND FURNITURE??).
/disagree to both.
It's hard enough to pay for upkeep of harvesters and acquire nice decorative items in this game.
/Disagree Structure (Small harvesters would be ok to decay)
/Disagree Furniture
It would be better to replace the maintenance that is currently paid to structures with something that Architects can build. If things decay I would never be able to sell them at a good price.