Architect Archive

As an Architect, I can see people wanting this but, as a player, I would be really pissed off if you added decay to my structures and took away my redeed ability.

I say, instead of trying to piss off every player in the game in order to have a renewable income, why don't we come up with ways to provide a valuable SERVICE to the players to get a renewable income.

From some of the ideas I have seen so far, I think people are trying their hardest ot royallytick off the players. We don't need them upset with us and see us as being a greedy money grubbing class like the weaponsmiths.

We need items that will provide a valuable service to the players as a whole.

A couple of ideas I hadthat would be cheap to produce and cheap to sell but you would need a lot of them over and over and over.

1) Deeds that when placed, would create a 5x7 flat portion of land. You would then place your harvester, etc. on the now flat terrain. When the structure is moved, the terrain would return to normal. We all know how often people have to move harvesters.

2) Reduce the maint. fee on houses but, require a structure repair kit every so often. Ideally, the structure repair kits would cost the same amount as the reduction in maint. fees.

These are just 2 ideas that would provide a renewable income and provide a valuable service to the players.

Let's look at this and come up with ways to help the population and at the same time provide us with renewable income instead of coming up with ways of renewable income at the expense of the players and making them mad at us.

If you were just a player and not an Architect, would you really want your redeed ability taken away and have to spend 125k on another large house just to move? Or have to buy all new harvesters each and every time a resource shifted? Come on, quit trying to make the players bend over. We get that enough as it is.

NO HOUSING DECAY.

We pay maintenence so it doesn't go "Poof" (Which it shouldn't do to begin with, it should start to crumble, not instantly vanish). So how can some of you Architects suggest such a thing? Unless I see the following:

A: No more maintenence requirements
B: All items inside GO TO THE BANK INSTEAD OF VANISHING

I don't even wanna HEAR the notion of decay for housing.

NOTE: I currently do not own a home for any of my characters, not even my Artisan, I simply despise the idea of a housing system that's too much like musical chairs.

I just bought my third house--all of them are for roleplaying purposes. I searched all over Naboo and Corellia to try to find the right furniture to decorate them with, and all the vendors were either empty or had low end furniture.

Two things:

1) If housing decay is meant to increase a renewable market, why is it I can't even find the furniture I need for my homes at the moment? I can't find data pads anywhere, and high end furniture just not around.

2) Now with one house as a business/home and two houses used for roleplaying purposes, if I have to suddenly account for the decay on three houses, and all the subsequent furniture that resides therein, then I must be frank and say those extra houses are going bye-bye along with all the extra furniture. I can't afford to replace 200k worth of goods every couple weeks, ontop of the maintenance. It's a simple fact.

Look at the lastest statistics from Holo. There are more Architects than Weaponsmiths. That right there should tell you what the issue is. There are too many Architects. The supply (seemingly) is greater than the demand. That is a major reason Architects are notseeing cash flow.

So, I take the crickets chirping in this topic to mean that you all want decay in and piss off the players but not willing to come up with stuff that would benefit the players?

I keep hearing decay this and decay that and nothing about getting stuff we could sell on a regular basis to help players.

I really am sad to see Architects headed in this direction. From what I have read, I really don't care for how this is heading.

If decay is done correctly and responsibly things should be fine. Houses should never go poof, but maybe become unusable as storage containers until they get fixed. Factories should never go poof, but have a limit to the number of runs they can peform. There needs to be turn over on everything. If you take the additude that nothing you have in this game will last you forever, as it does in life, then you may find decay or simply structure turn over, I personally hate decay, more acceptable. Something needs to be done, and making power ups isn't the solution. People become architects to make buildings, not power ups. People new to the game have every right to expect that they can become an architect and make structures, not just powerups. They pay their $15 a month, just like the rest of us.

I agree that terrain modification would be useful, but I don't think it's going to happen unfortunately.

Repair kits or replaceable parts seem to be the best way to go, but unfortunately it's not my call. It's the population's call, and more importantly the devs...

As far as repair kits go, many people have expressed the idea that they don't want to be running to people's house. I suppose that people could use them themselves...

Personally Ilike things the way they are. I can sell relatively well, but I do agree that there wil be a long term problem. I think experimentation is the way to go with this, but that issue seems split down the middle. Soon I will post a poll and see who wantsdecaywho doesnt, and I will post the same poll in the "SWG Discussion" to see how the "rest of the world" feels about it. Once that's done we'll get a better idea if this will fly or not.

Let me tell you I'm not hot on the idea of losing my structures too, but it's all for the sake of balance. You can't make everyone happy all of the time

I am still very stuck on the:

No decay for housing
No redeed on housing after 24 hours (or make it work the same way as vendor initialization)
Decay for Harvesers and Factories (just like real life)
No decay on furniture just add more items over time (remove some at times)

I believe in decay on everything but houses / PA's. You can add furnishings and clothes to that list, if they add enough style changes, to keep them an ever expanding market.

The only reason they should be exempt, is the added difficulties imposed on the players simply would not be beneficial to the game.

My take on maintenance on harvestors / factory's / whatever else, is that it simply should not exist. You should buy something, with it's durability being shown, and haveing a direct correlation with how long it will last ("in use" time only counted), and when that time is up, it's no longer useable. I realize the dev's want more cash sinks, but to be honest, until some developer creates a game, that actually has a functional idea of how an economy works, and stops putting printing presses for cash on every street corner, I can't take thier idea's on how to "fix" economic things seriously. I'd much rather see a hefty sales tax percentage imposed, if they feel they need to take money out of the economy, rather than any of the solutions I've seen them put forth, which simply unfairly burden specific professions.

This is my opinion at least

Vorgus on Bria

Now the aboveI could somewhat agree with. LEAVE HOUSES AND HALLS ALONE. Harvesters I could care less about as players wanted them to be disposable in the first place. Factories? I think maybe they should still have Maintenence, especially a larger factory.

Take the silences as this discussion is going on in a couple threads where both sides of the issue have been discussing it. Putting the question of "Do you want to be greedy or nice" isn't going to solicit a meaningful discussion.

Fidg'Ter

I'm sorry but taking away redeeding is VERY VERY bad idea and a dangerous one. We don't need MORE nerfs. We need solutions that ADD to the value, not take away. We get nerfed enough as it is in this game.

The Dev team hits us with enough nerfs, we don't need players suggesting more nerfs.

You take away redeeding and I gurantee you, it will hurt us more than it will help us. People already mostly buy houses just for looks and storage. You start adding things like no redeed and people just won't buy houses or even upgrade and live out of their banks. I did it in EQ for over 4 years, people will do it again. Tell me houw that will help us out in the long run? What good is being an Architect if noone wants to buy your products because they have no need for them and you pissed them off?

No, going back and nerfing stuff just to give us a renewable income is very bad idea.

Like Archangel said, I like things the way they are. I try to look at things not only from a MA point of view but a player point of view because it will effect me as a player also.

We need to come up with ADDED value and ADDITIONS to HELP the player, not take away and piss em off and hurt them.

Please, let's not get so greedy that we try to have changes made that would hurt the playerbase. Look at things from a player perspective. Think about the other players and how the changes you propose will effect them in a negative way. Come up with stuff that will help the players in a POSITIVE way and I guarantee you repeat sales.

Let's not get so wrapped up in our own selves and what's good for us as a profession that we suggest things to hurt the playerbase. We have to consider them and how it effects them. They are our customers afterall. If you ran a store in RL, would you make changes that would negatively effect your customers? No, you think about your customers. You put them first and make them feel like it's worth coming back to you.