Architect Archive

You know it has just occured to me, we don't need built in decay, we need obsolescence.
Over time an old model is replaced by a newer, improved model. Nobody has to change what they have, but if they are willing to spend the money they can just get something better.

A new house with more storage (75 items goes up to say 80, a few months later another new one with 90 and so on)
New Harvesters with 11 and 14 BER maxes or increased hopper sizesby design,
Specialist Harvesters maybe for example fpr Steel only(same for other resource types) but with higher extraction rates (maybe they can still pull other resources but only at 70% of the max).
New, faster vehicles with a speed increase of 10pct.
Maintenance could be included in this, maybe lower maintenance costs instead of other improvements for some items, the next 'new' version would then have increased maint again to offset the improvement given, this would 'balance' maintenance rather than forever reducing it until it reaches zero.
This can apply to just about everything in the structure line.

The old styles could no longer be available, resulting in a secondary market for 'used' products, like a second hand car market.

This is how things work in RL, this does not mean that anybody has to buy new, they just choose whether they want to keep up with the latest technology or stick with what they have already got.

AND NOBODY FACES DECAY in this idea.

What do you think ?

---

Xohamz wrote:

As I am a software developer, you will hear me use terms like "code" and "reusable" etc. Essentially I am try to tell the developers when I know changes will be easy.

Here's an easy one. You know how houses and camp can be place on really hilly terrain right?

Ok, architects get a new schematic for a framework, or derrick, that can be used to put a harvester of whatever size... anywhere. Now, this thing can only be used once and is lost when the harvester is moved / destroyed. There is already code to auto-magically level terrain for house and camp placement. Reuse that code and add the framework graphics around it. We won't care if it doesn't look great, really. It would be nice to use the nice deposits that are in the mountains.

Not everyone would need these, so they would be luxury items for experienced crafters. But since they only get used once, which could be rationalized by the fact that all terrain is different, we now have a consumable.

---

I know this has probably been posted before, but my 2c worth here:

Harvesters cost to redeed. Thats all good, nice money sink

1. A portion of this redeed cost goes to the maker of the harvester (say 10%)


2. Each redeed takes a portion of the BER away, since you have to basicly destroy the harvester to redeed it. I'd say 1/2 a BER per redeed.


3. Architects can create structure repair kits (limited uses) that can repair part of the BER breakdown, but not all of it. This way the end user can extend the life of his harvester for a small price but would still be forced to buy a new harvester eventually.

Definatly let us craft faction structures and furniture. I agree with what I saw earlier, there is no structure or piece of furniture in this game that a Master Architect should be unable to make.

Has anyone suggested decayingcandles yet?

Err....