Architect Archive

What i posted.. sorry you guys werent first. I just got to a point where I couldnt resist.

This post has not been made on the Architect board. It has not gotten approval from the Architect correspondent, and I apologize if I over step my boundaries. I just need to be heard for a few minutes.

Architect class is limited in a number of ways compared to other crafter classes. The ability to experiment on the final product is broken. This leaves the Architect class to sell all of their products at a set price and to change due to fluctuations in supply and demand. All products are considered equal and thus Architect competition is solely based on Credit per Unit and not on experimented items. This capacity change was to allow architects the ability to compete a little bit more in a stagnant market. The problem is, the change affected everyone, more than they intended. Currently there are 3 experimented trees for the Architect Durability, Storage, and Effectiveness. According to the Developers, Effectiveness (extract rate) will not be experimentable due to the fact that it will be game/economy breaking and we know what happens when Storage was to be experimentable. The only thing left is Durability. Which would probably decrease the maintenance rate of your harvester/house. As it is now the Architect tree is stagnant. They do not need to worry about making a better product (because they can’t), competition is only though Credits per Unit, and Master Architects are not considered Masters of their profession due to the large number of Critical Failures, the inability to experiment on their craft, and anyone with a full Installations tree or Buildings tree can compete with a Master legitimately.

So what are the Master Architects to do? Reading a number of posts, some Architects would like to add Decay (Durability) to increase their customer base. There are some interesting arguments for against it:

Why should they add decay to my structures? I thought paying maintenance is enough. And if I let my harvester/house sit there unpaid for a certain amount of time, it disappears anyways, is that decay already?

Why would I want to buy a house/PA hall when I would have to buy a new one in (insert period of time here) It took me that long to decorate the darn place.

Both arguments are legitimate. There is nothing worse than adding another layer of micromanagement to your game.

Then what are we to do?? If all Master Architects products come out equal, and since all Novice Architects make Housing, Harvesters, and Furniture at an equal quality to the Master Architects, how are we to survive?

Simple Answer. FIX EXPERIMENTATION!

But how is that done with out it considered a nerf for everyone else?

Lets look at all of the 3 areas that Architects can work in.

Effectiveness:

Currently all harvesters are extracting at 100% efficiency. Believe it or not, your harvester is collecting at MAX RATE x (% of concentration) x (100% efficiency).

Effectiveness of the final product = 45%SPAN> % of concentration = 73%

Max Rate of a Large Harvester = 7.0

Extraction Rate = Max Rate x (% of concentration) x (100% efficiency)

Extraction Rate = 7 x .73 x (100% - 45%)

Extraction Rate = 7 x .73 x (55%)

Extraction Rate = 2.81.. YIKES

Storage:

They are storing your resources at a rate that was larger than intended at release, and will be kept that way due to the large uproar against nerfing it.

Storage of the final product = 85%

Max Storage of Large Harvester = 100000 (Not entirely sure on this number.. Using it for example)

Storage Rate = Max Storage x 85%

Storage Rate = 100000 x .85

Storage = 85000

Durability:

Personally I believe Decay is a bad idea. There is nothing worse than paying a large amount for a harvester, knowing that after a certain amount of redeeds or time, the deed will be dead. Currently we all are paying maintenance. Theoretically, if we are paying the maintenance, should decay be either extremely slow or none at all? Therefore, I propose this. Instead of forcing the player to buy new harvesters after a certain period of time, give them the option of when to do so. Use the durability of the final product related to the maintenance rate. For example:

Durability of the final product = 22%

Maintenance Rate of a small house = 8

Additional Maintenance Rate = 8 x (100% - 22%)

Additional Maintenance Rate = 8 x 78%

Additional Maintenance Rate = 8 x .78

Additional Maintenance Rate = 6.24

Final Maintenance Rate = Small House Rate + Additional Rate

Final Maintenance Rate = 8 + 6.24

Final Maintenance Rate = 14.24

So how does this help the Architects? Now everyone interested in a house/harvester has a choice. On the current system, a house is a house is a house. On an experimented system players now have a choice. Do I want to pay cheaper for a harvester that has a large Maintenance Rate, but better than average extraction rate? Should I pay more for a house that has a lower Maintenance Rate?

I have also read that Architects should be able to repair houses. Great Idea. Why not Housing Enhancement drops from mobs, or crafted from Architects? These can improve Maintenance Rate, Storage, or Extract Rates.

AND WHAT ABOUT FURNITURE?? Ah.. I know there are some furniture fiends out there just wondering what are we going to do about this line. The system doesn’t allow storage furniture to store, lights to light, and all furniture after a while is bland. Maybe we can have different color furniture? Just like different color druids, clothing and armor? Maybe some more plants? More furniture schematics?

If you are not an Architect, I want to post this warning to you. Changes will be made, and most of you wont like it.

Community, what do you think? Lets play with these numbers, give some pros and cons about these new systems, because this architect is not going to sit around and hope that changes will be made..

- Decay won't work.... it hurts us more than it helps us.... and just plains hurts everyone else.

- Better harvester efficency would work, but for some reason the devs don't like this... I think they should bite the bullet and do it.. so if we experimented it up fully we could improve the extraction rate up by about 50%

- Only thing that the devs will actually do, I agree, is change the maitence rate on things.... I would go about it a little different, and keep all non-experimented harvesters/houses/factories the same they are now... if a good architect experiments that, they can lower it.

so then a house rating of 8 would stay the same, but a newly crafted house that was experimented on could go down to 4...

This wouldn't be much for the houses, but for the big houses and pa halls and the big harvesters, this would be a very big deal and would benifit everyone. Miners could update their harvesters so they won't pay as much from day to day, and architects would be able to compete better and get more and new business

Unfortunately the devs are not going to increase the extraction rate. I forget where they posted it, but it was mentioned. Right now, all of our customers are paying low prices for 100% efficient machines. We can not go up on the Extract rate, but we can make it close to 100% as possible.

I think if they added specific drops for harvesters and houses to decrease the maintenance rate or increase the storage or the efficiency would be nice. And if they add drops.. why not allow the Architects make them?

This will get one bump.. and one bump only.. let it fall if it may...

ShaneMc....If they're not going to increase the efficiency of the harvesters, you can be **edit** sure they're not going to halve the maint rate of the houses. I'm sure that's probably the #2 money sink. They would need to jack the "default" maint rate, and let you experiment it back down to about where it is now.

Hey! devs! Charge more for intra-planet shuttle rides would you? you want a money sink? quit charging a measly 120c for a ride.

acer