Droid Engineer Archive

Well after this supposed Tax we all are going to have to pay. (think about the cost of NON Merchant vendors and this is what it will be like)

The devs have finally put the Nail in the DE coffin. Because Right now I barely sell anything off my vendor. Since Im still working towards Advertising III.

The devs hate us.

And I hate them. **edit**ing bastards.

Oh yes I can see whereyour post helps things. [/sarcasm]

Actually the Tax is what everyone wants, it will be a good thing if we get the tax that everyone is suggesting, and not the system that the Devs are suggesting.

The point is where getting the systems the devs want.

So again we are screwed. And its not like they read these anyway. So what I say doesnt matter. Im just complaining. Like everyone else does.

Keep in mind that the vendor maintenance fee is about the Database, not about a new money sink. Therefore, it is unlikely that the devs will implement the sales tax.

Right now, it won't hurt me too badly either. I have a few people that do most of my selling for me - and for a number of other crafters, as well.

So, I can drop a few of the "fast" movers into my vendor, and take the hit (note the quotes).

The problem will come if combat droids are ever made viable again. That is when we will take the real hit - people will expect combat droids to be in stock when the old ones wear out (see the upcoming test center notes, where they are going to use the critter formulas for droid deterioration).

Sketh wrote, "Keep in mind that the vendor maintenance fee is about the Database, not about a new money sink. Therefore, it is unlikely that the devs will implement the sales tax."

I see no relationship whatsoever between your assessment and your conclusion. Additionally it is contradictory to what Q-3PO wrote, "The game is in need of more money sinks and the vendor is an appropriate place to put that because it effects the economy in the transaction phase (meaning money is taken out of the system as it is being transferred around the system)."

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=merchant&message.id=5731#M5731

I see no relationship whatsoever between your assessment and your conclusion. Additionally it is contradictory to what Q-3PO wrote, "The game is in need of more money sinks and the vendor is an appropriate place to put that because it effects the economy in the transaction phase (meaning money is taken out of the system as it is being transferred around the system)."

I hate to say it, but Q-3P0's track record for saying what he means is not very good right now.

Consider what Holo has said about the database in reference to mellons, and then houses.

Consider just how many people will be shutting down their vendors if this fix goes into place.

Consider that a sales tax would achieve the same end as a stock tax.

Consider the ramifications of this change. Less vendors, less items, less availability, people doing all their transactionsface to face (most DE's do this anyway, but look at weapon smiths, tailors, chefs, etc).

There are thousands of posts in the primary thread concerning this change on the merchant board. GO read a few pages of them.

I'm not in the practice of evaluating the devs ability to say what they mean. However, considering the volume of upcoming data that will be added to the game: Quests, Player Cities, Steeds, Vehicles, Space expansion and who knows what else. I find it highly unlikely the devs would choose to nerf crafter vendors for the purpose of making space in the database.

We are only two months into a five year plus product and if, as you assert, the database is at near capacity thenSWG will never make it. No disrespect meant to you, but I'm more inclined to believe this change is exactly the credit sink Q-3PO said it was than I am your version of the sky is falling in regards to the database.

All that stuff you mentioned is far off. At least I hope, because first they need to fix the 1000 of bugs in game already. Not add 5000 More. I made 3 Bug reports today while playing. All on stuff that should of been fixed Months ago.

Like the Multiple times you have to select 3p0 at shuttle port to get the depart list up, and the Million times you have to push refresh key to get Stuff from Your stock room.

Its all total crap. And they keep adding it too us. Giving it right up the ass.

I have no problem paying a tax on something I SOLD.

I have a problem Paying a TAX on something that hasnt sold, and can sit on my vendor for a week before it does. The devs need TO LISTEN TO US. WE PAY THEM. NOT THE OTHER WAY.

If they want a credit sink, they why don't they impose a sales tax?

Or one of the MANY other, far better ideas that have been proposed.

I coudl be wrong - and maybe an just feeling a bit cynical right now. But I am not alone in my opinion.

I am not going to try to rehash the entire huge discussion here. Rather, I refer you to:

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=merchant&message.id=5731

Sketh asked, "If they want a credit sink, they why don't they impose a sales tax?" Understanding the motivations for decisions made by game designers is a tricky practice. Two things you can be sure of:

No developer will ever have as good of a microcosm perspective of a specific profession or game mechanic as a player who plays that aspect 20+ hours weekly.

Likewise...

No player will ever have as good of a macrocosm perspective as a developer. They have access to mass amounts of empirical data we do not and are privy to objectives set forth by management and marketing.

To bridge the macrocosmand the microcosm, developers sometimes choose to post an objective and solicit feedback from the players. Which is what they've done in regards to vendor maintenance changes. The process is working thus far as you pointed out, "...MANY other, far better ideas that have been proposed.".

We can only hope that the request for feedback was genuine, the player proposals are being read and the end result will be something we can all enjoy. I don't see how this process is best served by second guessing hidden agendas that may or may not be there.

Perhaps I jumped the gun - and I really hope that they do listen to the feedback.

Only time will tell.

And, to be honest, I do hope that I am wrong. I enjoy the game, and actually, think that there are many good things about it. I even enjoy being a DE.

I don't think that the devs are mallicious or bad people - far from it. However, I also know that they operate under certain requirements - both financial and technical. They may have to make some changes at times that they know will annoy the playerbase. When this happens, they will put as good a spin on it as they can.

I drect you to this rather informative presentation by Holo:

http://www.legendmud.org/raph/gaming/gdc_2002_community_files/frame.htm