Development Cycle Archive

I cannot see where the number allowed on the schematic affects the database. I am a tailor, I use a lot of synthetic cloth. If I need 1000 panels, I will make them. What limiting the number allowed does is force me to create 10 schematics and run the factory 10 times. Is that not MORE of a burden on your database than a single schematic?

Please do not do this to us crafters. Bring back tailor experimentation and give us some decay while you are at it. I am already seeing a large decline in my business.

"I'll state up front that there may be DB reasons why we don't want a huge number here, so I will have to check on whether changing it is feasible at all."

Whoa wait a minute, I missed that line. Uh.. by making schems 1000 you're wasting MORE database space? Are you nuts??? That would SAVE you space, that variable number being higher is NOT going to be more space in a database.. if anything you're saving space by having someone hold 1 schem of 1000, then people starting to schem MULTIPLE data schems of 100 each. Having ONE serial number of a schem should significantly lower your database space AND creation access for data schems.

That is the most insane thing I've heard yet about the SWG database system yet. I've worked with oracle, mysql and db2, theres no reason the schem size should affect anything at all. If anything, like I said, it should make people have LESS schem objects total.

- Z

Weird. I assumed this change had already happened as i used to be able to make upto 1000, but for the last month or so,100 has been the limit, regardless of what i try to make. No, i am not on the test server...

250 to 500 would be nice. if final product schematics are to have adifferent limit, that wouldnt bother me, unless they were the higher limit (think about it... it would be a sadistic tease ).

Could you at least make it 300 for subcomponents? I can only speak from the viewpoint of a medical crafter. Many of the upper level schematics used by doctors and combat medics call for 3 identical subcomponents from a factory crate. With this change we will be limited to a max factory run of 33 on upper level stimps. If subcomponent schematics had a limit of 300, then I would at least be able to make 100 Stimp Es in a factory run.

I like the 100 item limit. I'm surprised people see this as a nerf, or are surprised by it anyway. I would think the slider should have clued people in that the intended limit was 100 to begin with.

With only 100 of each schematic, we'll see more variety of crafted items, and those who have been able to flood the markets to date will have to invest more lots into producing the same amounts in the same time, which should allow for more competition, since many will not be willing to make that investment. Hopefully this will allow for greater entry into the market by lower level crafters and casual crafters.

I could be way off, but that's my opinion anyway.

Bad, bad idea.

As a medical crafter, this would hurt me a lot. I have products that take 3 identical sumbomponents, and a 100 limit on a schematic would make it impossible for me to make full crates of these.

Also, 100 is tough. 100 items is exactly 2 crates. I would never be able to make more than 1 full crate of anything at a time, because once I have my 2 full crates of subcomps, I have to pull some out in order to make the final schematic. Having a factory run make 1 full crate and 1 crate of 46 or 47 items would annoy me and my customers to no end.

If you're going to do this, decrease the crate size of medical supplies to 20 or 25. That'd make them easier to sell anyways.

Falin

I thought the goal of the game from what I have read before was the you would be able to play for a few hours and fell like you have accomplished something, the trouble is that with this change you will have to play ever few hours to babysit your factories to turn out any product in mass. I don't see how this would be a database issue since I could make 10 runs of something at 100 items and get the same 1,000 the main limiting factor is the storage limits with houses and factories.

The only thing this is going to do that I see is hurt crafters, but we will not have time to do anything else but baby sit factories to be able to turn out any product in mass quantities.

I think 100 is to low, mabe 1k is to high but in reality as the guy said above, if i am gonna make 1k your limit isn't gonna stop me.. just force me to sit at my house for hours bored.

I suggest 500. It's a nice compromise.

Just a note from the wilderness that I don't especially care. I've always operated as if 1000 was a bug/exploit, and got by fine with 100-unit schematics. Rarely saw much need for more, and never for as high as 1000, as I'd be unlikely to actually run, say, 1000 synth cloth panels all at once, and if run over time, the ingredients would probably change, etc.

I suppose part of it is getting into really persnickety factory habits (like putting only *precisely* the amount called for by the schematic) when I first got my factory, and the **edit** things would stop working at the drop of a hat for no apparent reason....

I do very few factory runs but love being able to load my factory for a large batch of crates of Spice and being able to know the 2 vendors i'm supplying will be stocked for a few days before I have to do it again... I didn't start playing this game to have to stay around my factory for 24 hours or so to make sure I get the 1 product I need made in a quantity that will last 3-4 days... 1000 seems like a nice # for factory runs.

I'm curious tho' if the person who set-up the database has been sent to unemployment yet? Yet another game change made not to balance/fix/improve something but to help out a terrible database setup on the part of SOE... pretty **edit** sad that the crafters get punished again for SOE's incompetence.

Schematic:

3- Component A; 1- component B; desire 100 finals.

Old Method:

I create3 schematicsat 1000 count. I need100 finals,Irun 303 of A, 101 of B, and 100 finals foruse and therefore deterioration in terms of database use.3 persistent objects (the schematics), and say 100 items that're all on their way towards destruction.. or even if not, they're neatly packaged into a very few crates (and likely to stay there till needed, especially if bought as a crate)

New method:

With a 100 count limitation.. to do a 100 final run, I have to create4 schematics to do the 312 run of A, 4 schematics for the 104 run of B (crafting limitation:must have identical components, so each of the A schematics only produces 33 finals), and 4 schematics for the final (same reason as B). Now I have 8 or sopartially used schematics (12 tillI burn the A's), and a pack-full of odd subcomponents that cannot be used in the item.I won't be deleting those4 Bschematics, as they should have enough left to do another final run when I piece together 312 more A's with 4 more schematics, and 4 more finals. Not to mention, this is going to take 12 factory runs, meaning it'll take days to fill this one order, and you better believe the price is going to reflect it. This will also createa LOAD of unique objects, counting schematics, finals, unusable subs, etc.

And let me point out that this is just for 1 item. Any crafter that has any kind of serious demand is going to have to spend full time at crafting stations and factories keeping things moving. Stock will be impossible to replenish as the micro-managing timeand total production time will skyrocket on just 1 item. We'll be buying Factories in bulk just to put a dent in compensation for the time lost(I run 4 as is.. looks like I need to go rent another 12 lots). This takes any serious multi-component crafter out of the general population longer for death's, item use/decay, travel, cloning needs, and even goods needs (minus resources.. gotta buy those, no more room for harvestors with all the factories I'll need)... not to mention it'd be boring as heck.

This makes crafting sound like a serious headache. Almost like another game.. Star Wars: Factories. I kinda hoped I'd given up grinding in it's hardcore form once I had mastered Armorsmithing. I sincerely believe 1000 is a reasonable limit. Anything less will NOT reduce the number ofobjects (to the contrary, it will increase), it will NOT make the game more fun, and does NOT hurt the economy.

Please reconsider this change, as it will have a far-reaching effect on crafting as a whole, and I don't believe it'll be a positive one. In fact, I can't think of ONE positive aspect to restricting schematic use to 100 count.

Holcochron,

/rant on

I don't know what stories are being told to you by your dev team. But these changes will make NO IMPACT on the database no matter what. People will make more things in this game do not nerf schematics as a dream of keeping the database under control. It's the same as the storage nerf, okay max 250 in my PA Hall, no problem I bought 5 houses instead (750 items) so how did that help the database!?

So please, the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT CHANGE SWG could do to fix the database issues is to have a SINGLE DATABASE SEVER for each galaxy. Bite the bullet buy some hardware, make a deal with oracle on the license and get it done. I'm worried that devs and management are blind to this very simple solution. It appears there are up to 7 galaxies on a database server. If we are wrong please correct us on this perception. But if we are right stop nerfing things to make 7 galaxies fit on a single database server.

/rant off

I'm sorry I have the upmost respect for you, as you know from my PM's. But I feel we are being beaten to death by changes that are designed with only the 'database' in mind. Last I checked the database doesn't play this game, we do.

I works the way it does, why even mess with it. I would rather see you fix things that really need to be fixed.

Droid colors not taking on final assemlbly. No game wide 'MARK" to compare how well items were crafted.

i.e. Tools and Stationary Crafting stations made by players have a condition. The modules for crafting stations inside a droid only has a stupid percentage effectiveness that we can TELL our customers.