Architect Archive

Ok, I sat down and thought about decay. You know who would hate it more then the people using our stuff. Us architects. NO other professions uses more harvestors and structures then us architects. We will shoot ourself in the foot with decay on our own structures. You know the saying, the shoe salesmans kids are barefoot. I sell 12 or more heavies a week and will never have all heavies myself, I never get ahead. So not only will I have to make more stuff for myself, I will have to make more stuff for everyone else. Good you say? No a headache, Do you really want to turn Architecture into a high volume business? 1 million resources a week kind of volume? Try and craft all the extra sturctures, along with trying to build that city cantina...

To increase profit for Architechts, get rid of failure on final combine. The catch being we don't get to experiment or something or don't get exp for final combines. I don't know what the negative should be to that, but if we don't fail on final combines we keep more resources in our pocket to be sold or made into other structures. Making master architec took so little time because you get alot of xp making things just for yourself or others so that really isn't an issue.

For us to make more money, keep adding more kinds of structures. Make it so we can change color schemes on the inside of houses. Better yet, if most architects were smart, they would realize that furniture is our Weaponsmith. I charge 5k for a couch that takes 500 resources. I like architecture because its low sales, but when I do sell its alot of money. Furniture is my high volume money maker.

Just a thought from a succesful architect.

The decay doesn't need to be as fast as say, armor or a weapon. In fact, it should be much slower than those items.

However, it still needs to exist otherwise we will eventually not be making any more buildings at all.

-Jubey, Core Tech Architect

I agree decay if done wrong could be more of a headache then a help to architects....

I think that maybe houses = no decay and harvesters/factories have decay but it takes them months to be where someone would have to replace them

The problem is people who buy that game box today, or 3 months ago or 3 months from now should get to play the game to its fullest without constraints. As things stand now servers will become saturated with all the building deeds people need. At that point a whole profession becomes unplayable. New people simply will not have that profession to play. They could go play on a new server, however rare one opens up, and then get to play an architect to its fullest. However that isn't going to happen often enough to satisfy the needs of the second most master profession in the game.

While I aggree that decay sucks for things like houses and shouldn't be there for them, non-redeed is better, for things like factories or harvesters it makes sense. In one shift I am able to pull enough resources from one harvester to rebuild that harvester. If we were limited to 10 redeeds, then that gives me 1 deed to break even and 9 deeds to make profit. Read that as 90% extra resources per deed. Some times you get lucky and can go two shifts without a redeed. I pulled over 400k in ore last night from 12 heavies and 8 mediums. That was from 2 1/2 days worth of mining, roughly half a short shift. That is enough to make a 15 heavy harvesters. I don't get the 'we are shooting ourselves if we do' arguement. The numbers and facts of the situation don't add up to that.

With that said I don't like the blanet decay. Houses should never go poof for any reason but shouldn't be freely movable or 'upgradable' as they are now. You want a new house or a new spot, you trash the old one and get a new one. Factories should be limited in runsbut never go poof. Harvesters should have a redeed limit, but one that is rather reasonable.

The economy needs turn over or it will die. New items like player cities will help, but it will make some schematics all but pointless, like those cdef pistols or bone armor we all have yet never make anymore.

My voice is also against that of decay.

Not that anyone really cares.

-Phal

Here's a variation on the decay idea, and if it has been brought up before, I appologize. (I also appologize for spelling errors - I'm at work, and trying to do this on the sly...)

Perhaps one way to introduce decay in a fair fashion would be to have harvesters and factories retain LIMITED damage when maintenance is not paid. For instance, you forget to pay maintenance on heavy harvester x. When you finally get around to checking it, you find that you have to pay 5000 credits to repair. No biggie - it was a big investment, so you're going to pay it. However, after you do so, you find that the durability rating (or whatever it is called for weapons, armor etc) is now down a few points. If you keep forgetting, then eventually your intsallation is unusable. Time for a new one!

Maybe to add to the pain a bit, the harvester or factory is also a little slower now, or requires a bit more upkeep to maintain, or can't hold as many resources - whatever. My thinking here is that buildings irl do deteriorate over time, but at a very slow pace. Sure, you can keep working with what you have, but at some point ultimately it makes sense to scrap it a make a new factory / harvester / whatever.I know it is a flawed arguement to compare game mechanics to reality, but there has to be a fair way to incorporate deterioration into our profession (although I like the 10 redeed idea in theory, I think that number is a bit too extreme - maybe a small is 10, medium 25, heavy 50 or more?).

Anyway, those are my 2 and a half credits, for what it is worth. Not claiming my ideas are better than any of the others out there; just tossing out more ideas. Please feel free to revise / refine / rebuke...

Cheers,

Maborushi Yuri

Keren, Naboo (Valcyn)