Architect Archive
Thread: Whats Next?? Getting our Voices Ready...
Elyssa wrote:
The simple fact is that my $15 guarantees me access to 8 fully functional characters. Any compromise that gives me less is an unacceptable compromise.
I agree. I have four characters on two servers (yes, I do have two accounts) On Sunrunner, where I don't play too often, I have all lots filled, and on Corbantis, my main server, I have all 20 lots filledalso. I think one of my old characters on Valcyn is still taking up10 lots too.
I just don't see that idea as a positive change for anyone.
the key thing is.. I dont dislike lot swaps for what they are I hate them for how they hurt the dynamics of the game... right now as architects are concerned there is no real market for anything but max BER and that hurts us as a whole.. We must break down our ability to mass produce. We must reduce the amount of resources being sucked in the game. We need resource Prices to increase ALOT. We need the best resources to cost stupid amounts. thus making the Best of our Products Rare and Expensive. We need our Costumers to have to make a choice. We need them to actually only be able to afford a BER 8 Medium Harvester. that way we Create a market for everything Else that is not the Best. right now this is not possible this is why we as Cafa Says only have 30 ish producing architects on the server.. that is because they can actually produce enough of the best to satisfy the server.. this is very sad.. and this has destroyed the economy of our game.
People fear Inflation but it is not a bad thing.. The Best should 1) be Hard for us to produce. 2) Be difficult for us to produce quantity 3) Be Hard for our consumers to aquire.
I want to attack Mass Production that is my nemisis. and the Front Line of this battle is resources. We must reduce how much is pulled from the planets.. You want to nerf BER? no biggie those who cross swap will get more... I want guilds to work together.. but it should be real working together Each guildy should actually have to go out and get the resources and deliver them to a storage bank that crafters have access too. The crafters could then use their lots for factories.. that is active participation.
If I could rewrite how admin is done. Structures would be broken into two Categories.
Residential ( anything you can declare residancy in ) and Commercial (factories and harvesters ) ...
Nothing would change with residential you would have 10 personal lots per server and unlimited admin rights on other peoples lots.
For Commercial Lots you would be Given 10 Commercial Lots per account...
Elyssa wrote
No. Anything that hinders my right to play the game as it is intended is an unacceptable solution.
As I am sure lot swapping was never intended to be part of the game mechanics to allow a small percentage of players on each server tohave a monoploy on the crafting professions.
we need to find our own solution to this issue before we are given a less elegant solution that we have had no say or input into itsimplementation.
I for one will happily deed up my houses and factories on servers I occasionally visit if it means giving back the crafting professions validity and brings balance to the servers economies, yup I will be affected aswell I to have many fully leveled characters across multiple servers but as my main 2 characters inlive are on chimaera I base myself there and only use my other characters occasionally whichI suspect is true of most of us)
I would be happy to hear of any solutions you think would be a better fit than what has been put forward
Dvnce wrote
If I could rewrite how admin is done. Structures would be broken into two Categories.
Residential ( anything you can declare residancy in ) and Commercial (factories and harvesters ) ...
Nothing would change with residential you would have 10 personal lots per server and unlimited admin rights on other peoples lots.
For Commercial Lots you would be Given 10 Commercial Lots per account...
Is there any SOE policy against lot swaps? Any enforcement? (pain in the #$%)
I would suggest focusing on making life more difficult for lot swapers.
Make it less likely for good spawns to occour under large concentrations of harvs.
Make admin rights only work if the player shows up at the harv once every/every other week.
If there is too many resources in the game. Reduce extraction rates across the board. This doesn't impact the lot trade issue one way or the other. Make good resources more rare across the board. etc.
Let's try to find a solution that won't hurt players that are currently playing the game as intended.
Anthemion wrote:
Is there any SOE policy against lot swaps? Any enforcement? (pain in the #$%)
AFAIk its not against their rules and they don't enforce anything. I'm not sure though.
I would suggest focusing on making life more difficult for lot swapers.
Make it less likely for good spawns to occour under large concentrations of harvs.
This might work. It should be given to SOE as a suggestion.But it might be near impossible for them to program it, we really can't know without more knowledge of how the resource spawns really work.
Make admin rights only work if the player shows up at the harv once every/every other week.
That would help some. It kill a lot of current farms. But people could get around it easily moving forward by just popping onto the lot swap characters for a minute once a week. If both sides do that then they'd be safe. Wouldn't take but a minute.
If there is too many resources in the game. Reduce extraction rates across the board. This doesn't impact the lot trade issue one way or the other. Make good resources more rare across the board. etc.
I think that would be perceived as a massive nerf. Right or not, thats how I think people would take it. Like respec on gun statsfor CU.
We'd still have cross server lot trades. So we'd still have the disparity where some people have an artificial, unintended advantage. And everyone's ouput would be cut in half, whether we're big or small.
Let's try to find a solution that won't hurt players that are currently playing the game as intended.
Thats my ideal goal.
There is always inequity in the world and there will always be those with an unfair advantage. Are we going to prohibit multiple accounts to keep those players from getting an artificial advantage? Are we willing to hurt those without an unfair advantage just to get at those who do?
Just playing devil’s advocate
Message Edited by faarsider on 06-03-2005 04:28 AM
Dvnce wrote:
the key thing is.. I dont dislike lot swaps for what they are I hate them for how they hurt the dynamics of the game... right now as architects are concerned there is no real market for anything but max BER and that hurts us as a whole.. We must break down our ability to mass produce. We must reduce the amount of resources being sucked in the game. We need resource Prices to increase ALOT. We need the best resources to cost stupid amounts. thus making the Best of our Products Rare and Expensive. We need our Costumers to have to make a choice. We need them to actually only be able to afford a BER 8 Medium Harvester. that way we Create a market for everything Else that is not the Best. right now this is not possible this is why we as Cafa Says only have 30 ish producing architects on the server.. that is because they can actually produce enough of the best to satisfy the server.. this is very sad.. and this has destroyed the economy of our game.
Well, I guess we can pull context for whatever reason. There are only 30ish active Architects because the scope of the profession is so limited by the vision of the developers that made it. Come on, can we not admit that a even semi-dedicated player without access to any factories could hand make enough items to stock every single server by his/herself?
See, this is where we differ. You are saying (not pass judgements)that the players abuse the system through lot swaps and that achievement gained thus(in a game about achievement, no less) is wrong. Seriously, what the hell kind of logic is that? Beyond that, you have steadfastly refused to acknowledge that the limitations on usefulness inherent to the design of an Architect are at fault here for the stagnation, and again point to achievers as the evil. I had this conversation with Akkori last night on vent, I understand the train of thought. I just fundamentally disagree with it. I shouldn't pay $15 a month to log in to find less of a game each time. This is what you are advocating. You want to create an artificial market by manipulating Architect's ability to glean resources instead of increasing our value to the SWG community through innovation. Everything else in the game moves forward on some level and your answer, from whatever source, has steadfastly been making a character in a science-fiction universe operate with fewer tools than exists in today's real society.
Consumers will not buy BER 8 harvestors. They simply won't do it. Your desire to further manipulate commerce to MAKE THEM have no other choice is nigh irrational. Increase the scope of the profession. MAKE NEWAND BETTER ITEMS THAT DON'T REQUIRE A PERFECT PRODUCT TO HAVE VALUE IN A CONSUMER'S PURCHASE DECISIONS.
People fear Inflation but it is not a bad thing.. The Best should 1) be Hard for us to produce. 2) Be difficult for us to produce quantity 3) Be Hard for our consumers to aquire.
And again we return to your arguments from more than a year ago about inflation. If this were a game about promoting a socialist agenda, I'd be right there with you. It is not. It also should not move that way because you've assigned an economic agenda saying thus and have never been able to enact it. There is nothing in this crafting game I cannot produce. The only limitations that have slowed the paced are animal resources that the devs artificially manipulate, similar to the current krayt issue where nothing drops better than a good pearl. Your proposal, and their (devs) current actions speak directly to the opposite of achievement. You want a bland world where everythings sorta mediocre. I do not want to log in for a bland experience. Why must my adventure be less than any other players? The day they enact this limitation I want all weapons to require bio-linking so no one can have an aftermarket. Houses and harvestors should be bio-linked too. Wouldn't want someone to resale that house deed and deprive me of a future customer. Whenever someone takes novice architect maybe they should automatically just get a cheque for existing within the profession. Where the heck does your mediocrity end?
We had a decent chance at a market with the new loots, but one-use schematics pretty well screwed the pooch on that.
Our "problem" directly correlates with DE limitations that are being jockeyed around on their forums. They want hundreds of modules that a DE can swap out for different functionality on a needs basis of the customer. I want to be able to stain/paint a wooden chair soft brown. I want to be able to design the layout of a home. I want to be able to put an overwelming amount of modules together into a limited shell and produce a functional underground house on Tatooine that recognizes the semantics of weather patterns on that world. I want to be able to invent and produce harvestors that have specific functions/enhancements to current harvestors. I want to be able to produce a run of alcohol quickly and not wait four days to make a run of Breath of Heaven. I, in no shape, manner or form see limited lots as a solution to any one of these issues. Why do you?
Why should a guild member perform an action that you deem "involvement" instead of holding the factory lot(s)? If I hold the factory lot am I not then "not participating" under your schema? Adding another layer to "participation" for owning a communal factory is something youhaven't addressed at all other than to call it a commecial event. They already show up where I want them to to plant harvestors. Tonight we're having a guild hunt to collect meats and hide on Yavin. They are particpating. Why can they not plant the factories so that I can have direct control over the harvestor lots with my character that is surveying?
I want to attack Mass Production that is my nemisis. and the Front Line of this battle is resources. We must reduce how much is pulled from the planets.. You want to nerf BER? no biggie those who cross swap will get more... I want guilds to work together.. but it should be real working together Each guildy should actually have to go out and get the resources and deliver them to a storage bank that crafters have access too. The crafters could then use their lots for factories.. that is active participation.
If I could rewrite how admin is done. Structures would be broken into two Categories.
Residential ( anything you can declare residancy in ) and Commercial (factories and harvesters ) ...
Nothing would change with residential you would have 10 personal lots per server and unlimited admin rights on other peoples lots.
For Commercial Lots you would be Given 10 Commercial Lots per account...
Anthemion wrote:
...There is always inequity in the world and there will always be those with an unfair advantage. Are we going to prohibit multiple accounts to keep those players from getting an artificial advantage? Are we willing to hurt those without an unfair advantage just to get at those who do?
Just playing devil’s advocate
I agree with you.
Consider that as you add functionality and complexity to a game like this there are always going to be ways for players to use the functionality in unintended ways to gain an advantage. We take the good with the bad. It becomes a balancing act to keep the game healthy. I don't see any way to eliminate muling of toons (that is what I consider lot swapping to be). All we can do is make it more difficult to do.
Suggestions:
- Make good resource spawns not occur under harv farms. (advantage to the active miners)
- Reduce lifetime of admin rights on Dvnce's "commercial" structures. (requires logging to mule toon regularly)
- Limit the number of admin rights a player can have. (ex. I can only have admin on a total of 20 structures)
- Formalize the valid forms of lot "renting" between active players similar to the secure trade feature. (formalize the definition of abusive lot swapping)
- Prohibit cross server lot swapping posts in the forums. (unfortunately, adds to the forum moderator's duties)
None of this will eliminate the problem, but it'll knock it back severely and not hurt players playing as intended much giving us a net positive expectation on the balancing act. No one wants to log in one day and find that they can't enjoy the game as they have been before because a feature has been eliminated because some have been using it to achieve an artificial advantage.
Also, be sure to seperate the problem of too much high quality stuff in the game and too many resources from this lot swap issue. Both need to be addressed, but i feel it's somewhat foolish to assume that if you fix one that you'll fix the other.
amended:
Yes, I am uncomfortable with the limmit on the number of admin rights too. It's just another flavor of what I'm protesting in the first place.
Message Edited by Anthemion on 06-03-2005 02:40 PM
Anthemion wrote:
Pawlin,
...
Suggestions:
- Make good resource spawns not occur under harv farms. (advantage to the active miners)
- Reduce lifetime of admin rights on Dvnce's "commercial" structures. (requires logging to mule toon regularly)
- Limit the number of admin rights a player can have. (ex. I can only have admin on a total of 20 structures)
- Formalize the valid forms of lot "renting" between active players similar to the secure trade feature. (formalize the definition of abusive lot swapping)
- Prohibit cross server lot swapping posts in the forums. (unfortunately, adds to the forum moderator's duties)