Architect Archive

I am not an Architect.

I bought a house. I bought some stuff for it. I have not bought more for it because I can not afford it. I do not consider myself a powergamer.

It seems that Architects think some sort of decay for Architect items is the key to your profession.

I am all for you guys making money. But is there a way to do it that does not affect the casual gamer?

By this I mean, I can not afford to really decorate my house. I can afford the curent payments. But I also somtimes go away for a month for work, so if I have to go away for work, I can make my payment to keep my stuff (As it curently works). But if you add in decay then I will could very well come back and have nothing.

To be honest if decay was in I would probably just not own a house, or maybe keep my house but I would not put items in it.

So is there a way to make everyone happy?

My proposal is this (And as I am not an Architect I would really love some constructive feedback, not just NO because it is not exactly what you want).

1. Make everything non rededable. (this would solve a ton of problems. The Surveyor would hate it because they would be singled out the most. But I think this would really help the Architects and not hurt the Surveyor that much. It would also make moving require the purchase of another house)

2. Base house payment off items in house, then give home owners a choice. They can make payments to the system, or to an Architecht. This would in effect make an Architecht the "maintainer" of the house. By using an Architecht to miantain your house you get more bang for your buck (and the Architecht gets more money, and you save money).

3. Greater variety of items and diversity of items. (this would increase you buisness because people always want new things) Consider making Architecht items like deeds (thus if you want to put a new nicer couch in place of the old one you have to get rid of the old one).

4. Consider Add in structure decay to the following: PA Halls, Harvesters, and all City buildings when they are put into game.) Only.

Those are my basic ideas. To be completly honest with you guys (And I know no one really cares) but I liked the way UO handled your house. It made me feel like I did not HAVE to log on. I hate feeling like I have to treat a game like hard labor.

Thank you for your time I hope we can be constructive.

/salute

Quill

I am sorry but I really would hate to not be able to redeed my fleet of heavy harvestors, for I am now not an architect but a miner =(

But it gave me the idea of having ONLY ARCHITECTS OF CERTAIN LEVEL, able to redeed a house.

I meant it would hurt the miners the most.

But I like the idea of high level Architects able to move only.

The reason I put in the idea about Harvesters, is only because the miners in my PA are always bragging about how much money they make selling to the open markey. And they have said on many ocassions that they often just buy a new harvesteer and let the old one die out.

What about putting in decay for moving any item (not counting when you place an item in house the first time)? Or maybe decay for moving harvesters (similar to weapon decay as in you can move it a lot of times before having to get a new one) and still make houses and such non redeedable to all but the Master Architect. (Only I would put it up the skill line like a master can move a PA hall an expert a house of their expert type ext.)

Keep the ideas comming!

Quill

I had another idea to add.

What about adding in storage to items. Like a chest can actually hold items in it that do not cost against total item count. But everytime you remove something it adds to the decay rate. You get a warning that it will decay after X number of more uses and it makes it clear you will loose all items inside. This would force you to have to go buy a new chest, but also give you something very valuable in return for the hassle.

I'm all for money sinks that make things more fun!

You must be new to UO because the original system was you had to open your house door at least once every 5 days or it would dissappear. Ah those were the good 'ol days camping out houses that were going to fall. Hoping a PK guild didn't show up and claim the spot.

As for decay on structures, I think homes and furniture are fine. We don't need decay on everything in the architect line. We need decay on at least 1 desirable item. The most desirable items are harvesters. They make people money. If there's something that should wear out it is them and factories.

I'm thinking a harvester wears out anywhere between 250,000 - 1,000,000 resources mined. Possibly make this dependant on *gasp* expirementation. Factories could wear out after making 10,000 - 50,000 items. Again this could be based upon expirementation.

I think harvesters are the key as well.

But I do like the idea of you guys able to make real storage and letting it decay.

As to UO I played at the begining for like two years then tried it again for the last expansion. And yes I do rememebr those days But logging in to refresh was never that big of a deal to me, as it only took 5 mins of my day to do. (Until I went on vaction and had to beg a friend to log in and refresh) Which is what we want to avoid at all costs. So I did forget about that aspect of UO LOL

I don't think harvesters should just wear out. We are paying maintenance as it is. If decay is instituted, then I want the maintenance fees gone. I think the idea of redeeeding a house is great, but it should not soley be for Masters. It should be level appropriate. If you can make them, you can move them. I really don't see that working out so well. Too many architects would provide this service free as part of buying the house.

hmm houses in real life are there for centuries normally, so i would not like to see a decay on them.

no redeed on houses hmm, prolly but not on installations, with all this resource shifts, we couldnt keep up with anything when we couldnt redeed them.

only thing i could see a valuable decay on are harvesters or factories. they definately make the owner money (or at least help them with it), so if they would slowly degrade in effectiveness would be reasonable. but slow! not in one week or so, its to expensive to rebuy all harvesters ppl own every 2 weeks.

lets say they loose condition every time you redeed them. isnt such a valid idea?

cause for normal decay u pay maintainance and that prevents them from loosing condition, but a redeed could suffer loosing some.

imo thats not a to bad idea. what u think?