Architect Archive

Fix it

K, so that's 6 fix it's I've typed, a lose it, and back to fix it.

The effect of changing the power consumption, maintenance rate, and harvested material output is justso much to throw into a variable.

If we want it to be something like changing the color of a structure, ya sure it's no biggy. But if the things I mentioned above are brought into it, suddenly the dynamics of the entire resource economy are going to be into flux. If this were still beta (ya, I know it is still in a lot of ways, but I mean in regards to player/planet wipes) then it'd probably work just fine.We'd be talking about every harvester on every server suddenly beingnext to scrap.

If the change were significant enough, say 20%+ to material output, I'd want to scrap every harvester I have and build new ones, and so would every person in every profession that uses harvesters. If you're planning on doing crafting for any extended period of time, you realize that your prices will ultimately be determined by the harvesters you use. If I'm producing materials at a 20% lower cost than the guy next to me, that means I can afford to sell for 20% less.

Lets look at what this would do to the specialized resource economy. I'm master armorsmith/architect and currently I'm having to spend 100cr/u for a given material for armorsmithing...it's rare, it was first shift, nobody noticed it, etc. Now suddenly architects will also be in that market and the price will go up. Currently structures are sold at a rate of something like 3cr/u to 5cr/u. Creating a worthwhile change to harvester operation will have us seeking those same materials. Imagine even at 20cr/u for a heavy harvester...for a mineral harv that's just under 28k. 20 * 28 = 560k for a heavy mineral. Sounds nice selling it, but remember you'll want to use it too. With us added to thespecialized resource market, taking into account that we are the single largest draw on the resources available...prices will want to go through the roof, but they'll be held in check by the fact that nobody is going to buy a 100cr/u harvester or 2.8mil for a heavy.

It'd be cool, I think it would make architecture something of actual consequence in the game, I don't like the thought of what this would do to the resource market, and the operating procedures of every crafter in the game. But it would make for an interesting profession.

So yep, I'd like to see it fixed...but I think it should behandled with great care.

-Aravail

If they add decay to structures then FIX IT~

If they don't add decay then remove it.

fix it, so that there is divercity in the market, and we can charge more than 2 creds per unit. without experementation our stuff is just another way of selling ore in bulk.

---

Aravail wrote:

Fix it

K, so that's 6 fix it's I've typed, a lose it, and back to fix it.

The effect of changing the power consumption, maintenance rate, and harvested material output is justso much to throw into a variable.

If we want it to be something like changing the color of a structure, ya sure it's no biggy. But if the things I mentioned above are brought into it, suddenly the dynamics of the entire resource economy are going to be into flux. If this were still beta (ya, I know it is still in a lot of ways, but I mean in regards to player/planet wipes) then it'd probably work just fine.We'd be talking about every harvester on every server suddenly beingnext to scrap.

If the change were significant enough, say 20%+ to material output, I'd want to scrap every harvester I have and build new ones, and so would every person in every profession that uses harvesters. If you're planning on doing crafting for any extended period of time, you realize that your prices will ultimately be determined by the harvesters you use. If I'm producing materials at a 20% lower cost than the guy next to me, that means I can afford to sell for 20% less.

Lets look at what this would do to the specialized resource economy. I'm master armorsmith/architect and currently I'm having to spend 100cr/u for a given material for armorsmithing...it's rare, it was first shift, nobody noticed it, etc. Now suddenly architects will also be in that market and the price will go up. Currently structures are sold at a rate of something like 3cr/u to 5cr/u. Creating a worthwhile change to harvester operation will have us seeking those same materials. Imagine even at 20cr/u for a heavy harvester...for a mineral harv that's just under 28k. 20 * 28 = 560k for a heavy mineral. Sounds nice selling it, but remember you'll want to use it too. With us added to thespecialized resource market, taking into account that we are the single largest draw on the resources available...prices will want to go through the roof, but they'll be held in check by the fact that nobody is going to buy a 100cr/u harvester or 2.8mil for a heavy.

It'd be cool, I think it would make architecture something of actual consequence in the game, I don't like the thought of what this would do to the resource market, and the operating procedures of every crafter in the game. But it would make for an interesting profession.

So yep, I'd like to see it fixed...but I think it should behandled with great care.

-Aravail

---

I just dont believe that Sony will make it that much of a difference and if they do I still dont believe that people would be willing to pay more for the harvesters than they cost now. Who knows maybe both sony and the people that play this game will surprise me if its implemented.

Keep it.

I'd like to think I could concentrate on quality products, take pride in craftsmanship... but I can't. Not until they fix it.

Nielson Villejo

Master Architect, Master Artisan of Flurry

I say lose it:

I don't want to have to explain to people about the benefits, because they will want the best for cheap. I don't want to have to educate people about architecture all over again. No "so what will my maintenace be?" Losing it would make crafting easier and faster. I don't think decay is the answer either. I think we should get part of the maitenance, but put a cap on how much we get, like UXP.

I say fix it.

Bianca Minola

Master Architect/Master Artisan Tempest

Fix it....

if you lose it, you'll probably never get it back.

But, I'm a tailor...)

Looks like some experimentation on harvesters may have snuck into the patch on test center. Whether this was intended or is a bug there's been no answer. What seems to have changed is the hopper size. Hoppers have been made much smaller but via experimentation (storage) size can be increased.

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=TestCenter&message.id=17744

I'm pretty sure that's already a live feature as I use that already when making harvesters. I've never tested out the capacity of a non-experimented versus an experimented one, but I do have the ability to experiment the hopper size on live servers.

Fix it.

Before Function Ratings appeared on Crafting Stations, I could only sell them at 3k. Not that Function Rating is an issue I can still sell crappy ones at 3k, but I can pull in 1k per Function Rating on my high end stations. Thisis an incredible increase in profits that can be had in Architecture.

When one takes a look at Experimentation across the board, the statistic you would want to focus on for a high productivity harvester would be Effectiveness. By looking at the draft schematics for various Architecture structures, in all major structures that I've taken a look at, the Effectiveness is determined by the resources utilized in components like the Ore Mining Unit or Harvesting Mechanism. Basic Architecture components like Structural Modules, Wall Modules and the like have NO bearing on final structure Effectiveness. While novice Architects may not find much business hawking structures early on, they will find business assembling Wall Modules and selling them to established Master Architects. When you look at all of the crafting professions from the top down, Architecturefunctions far more friendly for Novices in that field than any other due to the viability of low-end components capable of being utilized in high-end products. As well asArchitecture isset up to promote apprentices, the opportunity should not be lost to really set off the profession by fixing Experimentation.

Besides, resource management is what sets apart a good crafter from a bad one.

We've been allowed to be too lazy for too long.

Yes we've always been able to experiment on hopper size it just has never made difference because of the large size of the hoppers on a non experimented harvester. What has been changed on test is hopper size, they've been made noticable smaller making experimenting on hopper size worthwhile especially if your market is geared towards the casual resource gatherer that leaves a harvester running for several days.

ahhh I gotcha now. That's a good change. I hope that makes it live as long as there's no bugginess in there. Might make some of the more casual miners want to get better harvesters.