Architect Archive

I know this isn't a "bug", but can we get the cost of making a schematic removed? We shouldn't be losing materials while making a schematic since we don't get any exp while using that option.

Also, removing the loss of resources, would allow all crafters to test different situations with different resources and not have to lose resources. This would also allow for better made products from all crafters.

Finally, to substantiate this request, the stages of creating an item are like making that item using a CAD program until you "Create Prototype". So, the argument of saying that you need to use materials to create a schematic are not valid since you have not left the drafting board yet.

Any ideas on this or flames welcome...

I disagree, because then everybody would simple craft/experiment until they got a perfect percentage. It my be feasible to architects, who don't need to experiment, but think of all the armor/weaponsmiths out there who would abuse it to death.

Understood, but isn't that the purpose of using CAD to design? You keep designing until you reach that combination that makes a product that your happy with and customers would be happy with as well.

I personally would prefer a system that didn't take up resources to make a schematic, but maybe took a monetary value based on the complexity or number of resourcesusedforthe item that will be made into a schematic.

My purpose of this thread is that there are times that you only have limited amounts of a specific resource and losing those resources just to make a schematic can be devastating. Also, if your making structures for others by just asking them to bring resources to make it, you don't have to try and calculate all the "extra" resources needed as well.

I have to agree that the resource costs needs to remain in the schematic.

That makes up for the absence of critical failures in factories and represents costs associated with initializing mass production.

---

Dayln wrote:

I have to agree that the resource costs needs to remain in the schematic.

That makes up for the absence of critical failures in factories and represents costs associated with initializing mass production.

---

Ok, maybe I misunderstood your statement...

How does keeping the loss of resources make up for Crititcal Failures? If you crit, you lose those resources and have to start over.

Also, that is why I stated that having a monetary value would be preferred. This would allow the architect/crafter to decide whether it is worth it to scratch that schematic and lose money in order to make another schematic that may or may not be better.

Also, having a monetary value, it would be easy to add that to the cost of making the final item.

A factory DOESNT crit fail. u tell it to make 100 of an item and u get 100 items no crit fails.. the schematic is your 1 crit fail so to speak of those 100 items

if you want a monetary cost, then just buy the resources u use to make the schematic and voila you have lost money when you create it heh

It's basically like creating a prototype or engineering sample for the factory to go by. You need to make a sample of the item to test it to see if it's going to work. A CAD drawing doesn't prove something works. You have to actually make the item and test it to see if it's going to work. Once you get a working item, then you mass produce it.

---

Scortch wrote:

It's basically like creating a prototype or engineering sample for the factory to go by. You need to make a sample of the item to test it to see if it's going to work. A CAD drawing doesn't prove something works. You have to actually make the item and test it to see if it's going to work. Once you get a working item, then you mass produce it.

---

Sorry, but it's not like making a prototype. That's why there is a Create Prototype button... so you can make a Prototype.

The Schematic is an instruction set created during development to run the factory. Schematics (instruction sets) don't use materials. There bits of data using the numeric values from the items you intend to use, nothing more, nothing less.

So based off of this information, schematics should not use any materials. The material use should come when you "Create Prototype" or make them in a Factory.

You are turning this into a semantic arguement. Whether or not he uses the word 'prototype' to help you understand his positionand whether or not the word is used in the UI of the game is completely irrelevant.

Its not about semantics, its about game mechanics. The first person who replied to you was correct. If no resources were consumed making schematics, then no one would critically fail. Ever.

They would keep trying to make schematics until they got what they wanted, and then they would create the item in the factory.

That is not balancing to the game mechanics.

Adding a monetary cost to creating a schematic would tend to fall into 1 of 2 categories.

1. its so low as to be irrelevant and then you're stuck with 'no critical fails' behavior.

2. Its high enough so that it would be preventative, and no one would use it.

I imagine there may be some middle ground, but I also imagine that all other classes wouldn't appreciate the extra cost just so architects can avoid critical failures.

Jubey, Core Tech Architect

Corbantis

---

Bolerro wrote:

The Schematic is an instruction set created during development to run the factory. Schematics (instruction sets) don't use materials. There bits of data using the numeric values from the items you intend to use, nothing more, nothing less.

---

I'mgenerally not a fan of making too many real-world comparisons, but I'll play along...

If we're not meant to use up any materials in the creation of the schematic, then they shouldn't tell us how well our experimentations went, or for that matter what any of the stats of the finished product are. How would you know how well something is going to perform if you don't actually build one and test it?

And on the semantic side, before you get the chance to create a manufacturing schematic, you load the resources into the crafting tool and get your result: "The assembly was a moderate/good/great/amazing success." Which implies that you did in fact have to assemble something and use up resources.

Ok, let me put this into the mix here... I find it funny how making a way that would reduce the crit failures (which everyone hates anyways) is becoming an issue.

This was a suggestion on a way to make the loss of materials not occur during the design phase of the process.

Also, as to being able to see the stats while experimenting, that is rather easy to figure out. Many company's use sophisticated technology to simulate the effects of different items. Heck, chemists can now take different molecules and simulate what would happen if they were introduced with each other. In SWG, were talking about an advanced society over our current world. So trying to say that you need to have a prototype fully manufactured to figure out effectiveness is not a valid argument.

Point is, no one likes losing resources due to crit failures. There is no reason while making a schematic, we have to lose resources. This is just a suggestion on a method that could be a decent resolution for making factory items.

Also, one other thing I forgot to point out. Once the fix is in place for schematics where you can't do any over 100, this will probably be another good reason as to not lose resources while making schematics.