Architect Archive

Well my biggest grievance with experimentation is that it would be hard to make schematics out of everything. It would be too costly to be practicable. However I think this might be a solid compromise.

Let's use Medium harvesters for example:

• 1 generator turbine is required.


• 1small storage moduleis required.


• 3 sturctural/wall modules are required.

People want; maintence to be less; power to be less; or for them to harvest more.

• You want increased harvesting performance: 100% generator turbine


• You want increased storage capacity: 100% small storage module


• You want decreased maintence: 100% structural/wall module


• You want decreased power consumption: 100% conductivity

The beauty is that now you only have to make 1 schematical component instead of making everything. You can make a schematic of the final model if you wish. This would save a huge amount of resources and, I feel, making experimentation very worthwhile. This type of layout can be laid to every single architectural item. For example, a factory, if you want it to produce faster: 100% Manufacturing Mechanism.

What do other architects think?

good idea but right now theres is problems if expermitation at all will affect these things

Experimentation doesn't do crap right now, but people want expirementation to mean something. This was my idea of implementing it so it does mean something and at the same time doesn't kill us.

I like this idea.

I recently built my first factory out of crappy rocks and pieces of metal I found laying around the soil. I put the entire thing together while shuffling through the dirt for gas pockets. Funny thing is . . . it's probably just as good as the uber high quality max experimented titan factory that Mr. Master Architect spent weeks working on!

C'mon, give SOME reason to do the job right.

Bump for the day shift people.

It would be great ..... if experimentation even worked on architect items ........

Well Cyberthugg when/if experimentation ever gets implemented into architect it has to be done the right way. Right now with the current system it would be too clunky to really consider. I mean having to make every single subcomponent at max efficiency, then turning them into schematics. It would be a nightmare. My idea was to make so you can selectively design your structures. It's not painful to make a single sub-component schematic to effect 1 attribute. This way you can at least get a more narrowed focus on the final combine and won't necessarily have to make a final combine schematic.

WHat I do not understand is why it is even necessary to make a schematic of final combine.... In theory the higher then quality of the sub component the higher the quality of final combine. So, theoretically, you'd only really need to make schematics for sub components and just hand experiment the final combine. You do not have to make a schematic to do a final combine.

Consistency my friend. How can you guarantee quality without consistency? You may have a critical failure on the final combine during experiementation and lose 20% to a stat. How can you justify a higher price* if your product ends up being screwed up.

* This is what we are all talking about here right? I mean the whole point of adding experimentation is so we can differentiate ourselves and sell for higher prices. Right?

Thats just it Canda...in theory

This idea would put us more on a par with weaponcrafters and armorcrafters. Not in pricing per resource of course, but in how we build our product.

One of the advantages of factory ownership is making that uber schematic and then running off a few hundred copies. Architects don't have that option currently. Experimenting on a final structure (if experimentation worked) could be incredibly costly, since we could blow a 20k resource item very easily trying to make it more efficient or whatever. But having experimentation work on the subcomponents and having that carry over to the final product, would allow us to lower the risk. While our subcomponent schematics are more resource intensive than a weaponcrafters final schematic, they are much more affordable than a critical fail experiment on a large house.

I think you got the jist of what I was aiming at Deoka. With better quality sub components, ones most likely emperimented and created in a factory, our final combine (with say 50% experimented subs) would have a 50% less chance to fail (random number).

It's all about where do we want to weight our experimentation. Personally I'd rather weight it to subcomponents instead of the final combine. I don't mind heavily experimenting and failing on a generator turbine (1450) instead of a factory (13430). You could still expirement on, and are encourged to do so, the final combine, but it won't carry as much weight as the subcomponents.