Architect Archive

---

Sedryn wrote:
Housing does not decay. 24 hours after placing a house you can not redeed it.
People do move, When they do they will have to destroy their home and buy a new one.
This will curb the "What do I pay maintenance fees for" question. Houses in real life can last
for hundreds of years if maintained but how many do you see being moved?
(possibly add the ability to "transfer" ownership to someone else making players able to sell
the house instead of destroying it?)

---

Ionce knew a man who owned a company that moved houses for a business, and yes it was a viable business and he was making a pretty profit from the look of his house.

Hmmm...there's a lot of debate and a lot of ideas bouncing around out here. It's hard to make heads of tails of all of it, but I've got the gist of it now and will attempt to throw my own ideas out here:

1) Don't introduce a second set of decay rate for buildings beyond the current maintenance cost all buildings and installations require. Maintenance prevents B&I from falling apart, I say leave that particular system be.

2) Limited redeeds would be a pain for me, but it's a sound idea and should be pursued. I like the idea of a redeed value being placed on the deed when the building is torn down indicating how many more times you can put it up. Also, when Construction and the whole Architect Experimentation issue is fixed and working, make one of the qualities of experimentation affect the number of times a building can be redeeded (like most of the limited-use items in SWG such as grenades, Repair Kits, etc).

3)

3) Reduce the general effective extraction rates of all Harvesters by a notable percentage (say, 20-30%), then introduce a new class of installation 'power ups' only Architects can build to improve extraction rates. I've seen some REALLY good posts in this thread describing just such devices and making them unique to every harvester type. I highly suggest these B&I Power Ups require specific resources like many Elite professions schematics already do.

4) Move Personal Harvester to Novice Architect. Building them doesn't give non-Architects experience but does take away from an Architect's limited range of sellable products.

There, that's my opinion.

---

Ropock wrote:
Vorgus, you won't see this because maintenance and re-deed fees are the best way to get money out of the economy. Something the devs are working hard at to make happen at a faster rate, not a slower one. If you implement what you are talking about, it would be ON TOP of maintenance fees, not a replacement.

---

Yes they are, but not to the sole benefit of Architects.

Houses, factories, PA Halls- cannot be redeeded after one server cycle.

Harvestors - Cap the number of total resources it can mine before being useless. I've seen the approach of 10 redeeds as a factor. Why not just say a heavy harvestor can pull up 1 million units before it breaks down and becomes useless? Small perhaps 100k and a medium maybe 300k.

Furniture - don't mess with it.

I thinks its a horrible idea. im not a architect but i was once. Its a horrible idea cause if i have to pay you 140k for a large house every time i wanna move ill just say screw you anywayz. same with harvestors Id rather just stay where i am.

I was rethinking my 'replacement parts' idea a bit. Originally, I suggested a set of new components but in truth these componentsare already in place .... ie. ore mining unit, fluidic drilling pump, harvester mechanism.

In interests to cut new coding and get this to us faster, please consider this.

If you look at harvesters... they generally have5 subcomponents (counting the final assembly).

• power unit:generator turbine


• structure: wall module, structure module


• final assembly


• storage: storage module


• collection device: ore mining unit, harvester mech, fluidic drilling pump

Coincidently, there are 5 basic variables that could be affected by subcomponents

• power consumption rate


• maintenance rate


• overall condition (starting condition)


• storage volume


• collection rate

Alternate proposal to new (boring bit, etc)replacement parts:

Make existing subcomponentsaffect performance and condition.

Allow these subcomponents to be experimented on and have their effectiveness/durability affect the related variable.

• power unit (gen turbine): power consumption rate


• structure (walls): maintenance rate


• final assembly: overall/starting condition


• storage (storage modules) : storage volume


• collection device (ore mining unit): collection rate

I think this really just follows the initial intent of the structure sub-components.

If possible, have these sub-components decay and be replacable. The new part will change the machines overall performance.

This works for all but the final assembly which isn't really a subcomponent, but that's ok because we don't want to be able to raise/renew the overall condition of the structure. We want that to decay.

Overall condition (as determined by the experimented durability in the final assembly) sets the starting condition. This condition ticks down slowly. This decay cannot be replaced.

Perhaps starting condition would be 500 + 10 per % of experimented durability. 500-1500 (averaging 1000 if we get more experiment points).

Perhaps decay to the overall condition ticks down at a rate of .5 points per hour (168 hours per week). If a harvester starts at 1000... after a week it would be 750 or so.

Redeed kicker to overall condition: Each redeed removes 50 points from the overall condition.

I think think this would cause most harvesters to last 4-12 weeks of operational time (at about 1 redeed/week).

If the replacable part thing is too hard to code... at least we would have experimentation working and overall structure decay in place.

I focused on harvesters because I think they represent 90% of all structures out there.

For houses, just ignore the storage and collection rate variable.

• Houses canbe redeeded at same -50 condition fee, but should last much longerlike a .2 pt/hour decay rate.


• PA halls cannot be redeeded (so have to buy a new one to move), but have a 0 decay rate as long as maintenance is paid. If maintenance if unpaid, structure decays until destruction.


• Furniture:treat asitems (which they are) with similar decay to clothes etc.. (whatever that turns out to be)

Replacement Parts: (I still see this as the desired long-range solution, the above proposal would lay framework for the replaceable part idea and also get us something sooner.)

If code and developer time allow, have the structure sub-components decay and bereplacable. Perhaps advanced versions of these pieces further in the tree. Maybe an add-on/powerup component slotthat can boost certain variables. (I see coding problems with this, redeeding and the deed itselfhave to deal with whichsubparts it has in it, which is more data... and we know how much the devs love ideas with more data requirements)

Anyway, this is my reworked idea (with pieces stolen from the rest of ya).

Keh' Icoh

I like the basic idea Kerico, but I'd throw away experimentation and decay on the final product. you still get a renewable income... you still affect the performance, but as an architect you don't throw everything away for 1 bad experimentation on the final product and as a player you're fix costs are not as substantial as replacing the whole thing.

I prefer the idea of replacable parts, and it makes sense. I do not like decay.

But once the market becomes saturated with even more architects, what then? At some point you have to let the pain of capitalism weed out the surplus of Architects. (more Master Architects than master weaponsmiths from Holo's latest stat posting).

Uh, no

Here are my thoughts:

1) Don'tdisallow redeeding. There is already a cost associated with it. However, every time you redeeded a building you would lose a chunk of total durability, say 2%. If you need to redeed your house a few times to get it lined up right, no big deal. Harvesters would get to a point where it would be more practical to get a new one.

2) Have structures that come from deeds decay (lose current durability). Reduced current durability negatively impacts maintainence and if allowed to go to 0 the structure will vanish. Structures that have their maintainence lapse lose durability rather rapidly.But this can be restored with a Structure Repair Kit, which can restore x amount of durability up to the structure's maximum.

3) Experimentation should affect Structures... structures made by the best architects using the best materials should be more valuable. Experimentation should be able to affect:

• Durability


• Maintainence (in other words, a well amde structure would cost less to maintain)


• Efficiency (energy using structures would use less energy if well made)


• Productivity (harvesters and factories would have more production cycles per hour)

4) We need hueable furniture, and hueing kits for houses would be nice as well.

I don't like the proposal and here's why:

It wouldmake harvesting an impossibility in the long-term -- right now, I only drop harvesters when there's a resource I need in the area.I move my harvesters at LEAST 3 times a week due to the constant resource shifts (I'm on Bria, not sure if other servers have it this bad). If this proposal goes into effect, I'd be forced to keep my harvesters in one place, and if there was a resource I was looking for forever that finally came available on another planet, I'd be left out of gathering that resource. Or, if I read the original post right, I'd have up to 10 re-deeds? TEN??? What after that, I can't re-deed, or I can re-deed with a fee attached? No thanks.

Also, the current upkeep rate on harvesters, houses, and factories is already difficult enough. Many are rich in game, but I'm not. I don't sell the resources I pump for profit, as most do. I make armor, weapons, and other misc stuff (architect stuff) with my resources, leaving my other account (me and the bf play our warrior characters for credits) to do the money-making, which lately has become a chore with all the recent combat nerfs. (Good luck finding a combat mission that pays well that can be accomplished in a fair amount of time.)

SOLUTION: I think a better (and previously suggested) idea would be:Houses, harvesters, andfactoriesmade of poor quality materials should require more upkeep. This way thecrafters are still needed, not to mention they can charge more for a better crafted item, and the general population won't be utterly pissed off that they have to constantly buy new and re-deed, or face the possibility of not being able to re-deed beyond 'x' number of re-deeds.

this is ripped from one of my major posts which is a 2 part compilation of every idea I have seen and liked or thought of myself.

You can read the Entire (VERY FREAKIN LONG) Post here.

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=architect&message.id=22810

Here is the excerpt that directly relates to your query.

VII. Structure Decay/Fees/Functionality

A. Residential Structures.(Huts1 Small2 Medium4 Large6 Mansion8 PA10 Bank4 Clone4 Shuttle6 Starport10)

1.Do not decay.(This is how it currently is.)

2. Maintenance fees changed to Property Tax. (Could also add system to where location determined the amount of tax the owner(s) must pay. This would give the devs a greater degree of control as it would allow them to determine what areas are considered good and what areas are considered bad. This can even be extended to mayors of player cities to allow them to influence where structures are built.)

3.Redeed cost as normal.(maybe balanced a bit better for the various sizes.)

B. Commercial Structures(Tents1 Small2 Medium4 Large6 Stripmall8 Hospital8 Cantina8 Multifunction10)

1. Do not decayhowever they only function for a set period of time dependant on the quality of materials used. After the set time has elapsed the structure ceases to function and the player has 1 week to buy a new deed and feed the deed into the structure management terminal. Once this is done the player can choose to use the new structure setup or maintain the old setup. Warning to be given for changing setup as all items will be moved into a pile in the central area of thestructure and excess items over the item limit will return to the owners inv .... items over the inv limit will vanish. Vendors will remain though they will be moved to the center of the structure.

2. Maintenance fees changed toLease Payments. (Control can be given to mayors to set the rates so they can influence where business's will setup.)

3. Vending limited by skill.

4. Redeed costs as normal.

C. Industrial Structures(Mines)

1. Onlydecay when redeeded. The amount can be affected by the presence of a maintenance droid or your particular repair skill or even the presence of a Maintenance Technicion. The amount can also be reduced by paying larger and larger amounts during the redeed process. Decay can never be eliminated but by using the techniques above you can severely reduce its impact and extend the life of your structure.

2. Functionality will decay each time it is redeeded until the owner has no choice but to replace the structure.

D. Industrial Structures(Factories)

1. Only decay when used. 1% for every 100 items made.

2. Redeed as normal(Does not reset the decay.)

D. Military structures

1. Do not decay nor do they cost maintenance.

2. They canbe damaged and possibly destroyed by opposing factions requiring repair or replacement to become functional again.

3. Repaired items are gradually reduced in efficiency each time they are repaired.

4. These items cannot be redeeded. (however I advocate a system that allow a person to setup an item walk around to view its placement and then select place and activate. as long as they dont click place and activate they can pick the item up and move it around but the item will not function until it is placed and activated.)

E. Graphics for exteriors change to match the decay of the structure. (a la sims 4)

Granted this was written before the dev chat so i would probably adjust some of the items in this list. And some of it may not make a ton of sense outside the context of the original post. If you have 20 minutes or so i suggest readign and ripping off a few of the ideas put forth in that post heh. Thats how I got alot of those ideas. (Yea I know I quit Architect .... just having a hard time leaving the forum.)