Architect Archive
Thread: Proposal Need feedback before submitting
I need to post my top issue ASAP before the publish. I threw this proposal together last night while posts were still rolling in on the "Top Issues" post. I am allowed to pick one thing and throw it at the Devs right now, so this is what I came up with. If you think it's good, just post a /agree, if you disagree with something, post a few lines what you don't like about it. Don't worry about the other stuff as I will be discussing itlater on this week, but right now the other professions have a head start on us so I need to put this in right away (Im talking like this afternoon)
Profession: Architect
Top Issue: Critical failures cause too much damage to an Architect's ressource pool, possibly because the Structure Assembly is only set to (+55) instead of (+100).
Additional Details: There is a concern in the Architect community that critical failures on high-end structures can severely . Critical failures on final combines on structures such as PA Halls, Large Houses and Heavy Harvesters, especially when you have just reached that level, can have devastating effects on an Architect's income. The community feels that there is no way to reduce or prevent these from occuring. Tests have been done regarding the effects of using high/low end crafting stations as well as high/low end ressources, but tests have determined that there is no effect of critical failure frequency. Many architects are afraid to attempt to produce PA halls/large structure because it is a bit of a gamble. Logic also dictates that it is very difficult to "mess up" the construction of a house as far as loosing all ressources.
Some believe that Architects also suffer an increased number of critical failures due to the Structure Assembly (+55) instead of (+100) in relation to other professions. I subscribe to this theory, but have no data to back it up as of yet, as it is still being tested.
Proposed Solution: Increasing Structure Assembly from (+55) to (+100) at master, that would be a definite step in the right direction. Perhaps adjusting the Architect critical failure table would also work. Removing critical failures on final combines for all structures for Building IV, Installations III-IV, and Master Architect would be the ideal solution.
Note: On a side note, I believe that getting critical failures as a master in any profession is pretty shameful. I propose that critical failures for masters be greatly reduced. I hate to see master dancers fall down on a regular basis. It just seems wrong.
Balance issues: I understand that this could be unbalancing as other professions would continue suffering critical failures on their "high-end" combines. Potential balance "fixes" could include: Increasing critical failures on smaller components, decreasing critical failure rates across the board.
I had to propose some "counter-balance" suggestions as other professions might complain and the Devs will ask "why should you get this when others don't". Even though it seems like we get the bad end of things, I still have to justify it in the eyes of the Devs and theX thousand other artisans.
Although I disagree that Crit Failures should be thetop priority, I do agree that most of the community of architects feel that it should.
So, I suppose I do agree on that being the one you present, ( even though I disagree )
Dayln
p.s. Have I confused you yet?
/agree I guess..
I don't make anything anymore... I need a solution for that. :/
Heh, not bad Dayln. I don't think it's the "Top Priority" either, but I do think it's going to be the quickest fix for the moment, thats why I want to get it in now. The devs will work on this fora shortcouple ofdays (I hope) while I collect info on our long term problems like Experimentation, Constructionskilltree and Decay. Once I have enough info on that stuff I can launch it off. I have to take things sequentially unfortunately 
But it does seem to be a more popular issue. It will mean more money for us in the short term =)
Long term, the biggest problem we have is the lack of renewable income.
By the way, under additional details, the first sentence should be this:
There is a concern in the Architect community that critical failures on high-end structures can severely damage an architect's business in the short term.
Dont know what happened there. Were you guys REALLY reading this? 
I'll give you a half-agree. I think you picked the right issue (should be a quick fix, nothing too complicated involved), but I've got a couple nit-picks about the peculiars.
1) I'd roll this into a "our stats don't accumulate properly as compared to other crafting professsions" issue and include both structure assembly and structure experimentation. We should be topping out at +100 for both. Since the fix for one would pretty much be the same as the fix for the other, you might as well mention both in the report.
2) You had me on the rest of the post until I got to the solution:
Proposed Solution: Increasing Structure Assembly from (+55) to (+100) at master, that would be a definite step in the right direction.
Agreed so far...
Perhaps adjusting the Architect critical failure table would also work. Removing critical failures on final combines for all structures for Building IV, Installations III-IV, and Master Architect would be the ideal solution.
I'm definitely going to disagree with this part of the solution. 1) You're introducing something which something which requires balancing with the other classes, and 2) this is a needlessly complicated fix (and therefore not ideal).
I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but if you're going to suggest a fix of this nature, then let me suggest that instead of making it so that certain structures can't be crit failed on, how about suggesting that subcomponents are not destroyed in a critical failure for *all* professions, only the raw resources. This would keep you from having to suggest some sort of balance to other crafters because everyone of them would beneift from it.
Think about it, the thing that hurts most on crit failing on those particular structures is the loss of the walls and, to a lesser degree, the rest of the subcomponents. The devs want to there to be some sort of risk when crafting, that's why the crit failure system exists. I can accept that. However, what I can't accept is losing 56k worth of resources on our biggest item when other classes only lose 5k or so. If I crit fail on a PA hall, I can accept losing the 3900 units of raw resources as long as I get the subcomponents back (the resources of which have already been risked in their crafting).
Balance issues: I understand that this could be unbalancing as other professions would continue suffering critical failures on their "high-end" combines. Potential balance "fixes" could include: Increasing critical failures on smaller components, decreasing critical failure rates across the board.
Just to state it again, if you propose the system I'm suggesting, you won't need to offer up a counter-balance because it's fair and equal for all crafters.
Sorry for going on so long about this...I know you were looking for a quick survey, but I really feel that this is a much better suggestion and most likely one the devs would consider before making exceptions for certain schemslike you're talking about. I also think it's one that should be relatively easy for the devs to implement since it's just a matter of them filtering out subcomponents in the crit fail code.
How does this sound then?
The Solution that requires the least rebalancing would be to have all raw ressources destroyed in a critical failure but have all subcomponents remain valid. I propose this retooling be done across the board for all artisans.
Other options include: adjusting the Architect critical failure table, or removing critical failures on final combines for all structures for Building IV, Installations III-IV, and Master Architect.
I agree 100%
Perfect, and it help all classes and does not single Architects out. That is more likely to get you somewhere than anything else.
Better...but how about adding an example? The devs love for things to be made clear to them. 
The Solution that requires the least rebalancing would be to have all raw ressources destroyed in a critical failure but have all subcomponents remain valid.
Example: Currently if an architect critical fails on the assembly of a Guild Hall, they lose 3900 units of resources, 15 wall modules, 2 power core units, and 8 identical structure storage modules. Under the proposed system, the architect would still lose the 3900 units of raw resources, but the wall modules, power core units and structure storage modules would be returned to their inventory.
I propose this modification to critical failures be done across the board for all artisans.
Other options include: adjusting the Architect critical failure table, or removing critical failures on final combines for all structures for Building IV, Installations III-IV, and Master Architect.