Architect Archive
Thread: A Miners Message: Sent To Thunderheart
ThothTheWise wrote:
This thread has taken on a life of its own..both here and in the architects forum. I wish to thank you all for participating in this discussion.
Can I steer this just a Tad, into a more specific area? What do You see as the Major Overall Economic effect of Lot Trades in general?
As i said I am not for or against Lot Trades..I will do what ever i can to maximize what the game allowes Legitimatly to my maximum gain...thats called Business. What I Do want to know is what people see so e kind of economic sight in what they do. And while you all have been wonderful in showing me other ways to view different aspects ...the real economic hit, explained in asmuch detail as can be mustered needs to yet be addressed.
Message Edited by GarenTore on 06-09-2004 06:17 PM
I read this thread with some interest. I have 8 miners on a lot swap and I run 2 accounts, giving me access to 24 miners, 8 of which are static. (actually as I cba to move the miners with the 2nd account unless I REALLY want something 16 of them are static...) All small time stuff compared to some of the guys that have posted here i suppose. Also my lot swap is with a guild member who has his primary on another server, so I guess that I'm doing nothing wrong regarless of what SOE do. :?
But if the proposed change were to go through then I'd lose 8 miners straight off, I can't ask a guy that's on my server for maybe 3 or 4 hours a week to be running out to harvesters all the time! I also don't really want to have to be doing harvy runs with both my chars, as it's enough of a PITFA doing it every couple of days with just one...
I'm not saying that I agree with ppl running huge lot swapping arrangements with all and sundry from every server in the book, but it seems to me that the cure (regardless of it's actual manifestation) is going to be a lot worse than the current illness.
I'd quite like the dev team to leave the whole thing as it is, stick some kind of decay on harvesters or something(which will make doing lot swaps with virtual strangers harder as eventually you're gonna fail the repair check and make repeat business for the Archies) if you are going to do anything, but there are a lot of other things out there that are a lot more scewed up than lot swaps, how about they fix some of those first...?
Velisimner wrote:
Dvnce wrote:
Are you an evil person for doing this.. Not at all.. It takes Alot of Organization to run one of these farms effeicently.. But The big Question is.. are these GOOD FOR THE GAME... the answer Is not at all...
nothing against you Dvnce but by what divine right can you say that the answer is not at all.
Hey .. I know I am not Mr Holiness Himself.. I admit that.. but when He cant get the job done I am the one he calls...( on second while I put on the rubber suit to protect me from the lightning bolts
i think a huge issue for players especially miners, is that they need storage 2 lots for a house leaving 8 for mining. it just isnt enough. also if you rent a piece of equipment from some one, they arnt gonna follow you around and help you do the job you need to do with it. its a one tiem deal until you need that piece of equipment moved.
Then hire someone to mine.. for you.. It can be done.. If you cant find someone you arent offering enough for their service.. ( this is a prime example in why inflation would not be a bad thing.. )
i can honestly say that if cross-server lot trades were taken away i wouldnt give a care at all. but according to Dvnce's logic would THAT be good for the game. i think so. it would likely end the great fields of harvesters kikin around.
heh.. I am not sure but are you saying I am right here? I dont know if I am suppose to rebuttle...
i think thought, that the number of lots per char should be increased to 20. but i tihnk you shold only get that increase with time played in the game. but maybe thats a whole other debate.
i was never for cross-server lto trades i just wanted to point out the "fairness" that was explained to me by a CSR.
Message Edited by Dvnce on 06-09-2004 09:41 PM
Cafa wrote:
Then why the HELL did they cave on the crafting changes? A honest look at the numbers did not represent the majority of professions. But CAVE THEY DID.
Fivo Asia
Message Edited by Dvnce on 06-09-2004 10:31 PM
Cafa wrote:
...
Then why the HELL did they cave on the crafting changes? A honest look at the numbers did not represent the majority of professions. But CAVE THEY DID.
Message Edited by Pawlin on 06-09-2004 11:19 PM
EdOWar wrote:
Well, someone could make new characters over and over and give the starting cash to another...but it would take so much time to do that one could better spend the time running missions and earn even more money. You may feelthe lot swapping ispersonally wrong, but that's just your opinion (just like it's my opinion that it isn't wrong). I guess what matters in the end is what the devs think, and if they decide server lot swapping is bad, then they will do something about it no matter what any of us think.
As for the post about the Christmas holo-trading, yeah likeanyone wouldever be able to find the postsix months after the fact. As I recall it, it wasn't an open endorsement of holo-trading, but it basically amounted to a wink and a nod on the practice. The Devs and CSRs knew it was happening, knew weeks in advance of the Christmas holos being given out (as evidenced by all the annoying holo-trade posts in the trade forums leading up to Christmas--you'd have to be blind not to see them), and they didn't do anything to stop it. If they didn't want anyone to trade Christmas holos, they could have done something about it (like only giving the holo to the first toon made on each account, for example).
Slim Vargo, Corbantis
Message Edited by EdOWar on 06-09-2004 11:27 AM
The reason they didn't object to the whole holocron cross server trade thing was because it was their sole intention to drop the ottom out of the holocron market as it was starting to ruin the economy. Also if you'll recall in the closing days they actually did limit the holocron to characters that were more than just a couple of days old.
Anyway back to the point: I hate cross server lot traders. The amount of raw materials they throw onto the market kills the prices of nearly all finished goods (including, but not just, weapons).I hate the fact that if I've not been on for a day and I log in to find some new super quality metal, that all if not nearly all of the good % veins are camped with fields of heavies all bearing a similar name and a number. Don't try and tell me that they deserve to be there because they did the work to be there: I would have no problem in coming and finding 10 of the same named heavies in that spot, but when it's most everywhere I go to drop my alloted 6 harvesters it gets old, fast. Also don't tell me I should go and pay for the resource when I could just have pulled it out of the ground by the means granted to me by the developers.
Harvester certs are unfair: I don't really agree that a doctor should have to have some line in artisan to be able to use one or several.
A far better solution would be to provide certain class masters (WS, AS, Chef, etc) with additional lots, while making things like guild halls, and large houses take less lots. If for every skill box you had from random lines of the tree granted you +2 to lots or something totalling up to 10 or more at master, this would mean that we get the additional storage space we require and also that combat characters can't have the same number of lots as us. Alternatively you could have a certed system for different sizes of harvester that made them take up exponentially more lots as to their BER. This eliminates the problems of unplayed toons granting resource conglomerates the huge resource-pulling power they have.