Droid Engineer Archive
Thread: TH quote on Publish 8
Lonkley wrote:
The only thing we're promised in a MMORPG is that things will change. Given the choice of getting improvements with makign current products obsolete or getting nothing, ill take the improvements.
Malitevv wrote:
My general impression with this game so far is that the developers have something to learn where managing an economy is concerned. They do take efforts to temper the negative effects of changes if it affects a large portion of the player base, but they don't bother if the number of players directly affected is small. Trouble is that hurting players that feed products into the economy, even if the number of players doing so is small, has larger affects that damage the game as a whole and affect all players. My impression is that the developers don't understand this. And I am growing increasingly frustrated because of it. This game has new economic related features, but so far they are not being supported or managed very well.
Icarus-6 wrote:
jefmes wrote:
...SOMETHING needs to be addressed on these multiple module droids, it's just confusing and wasteful.
I'm almost certain the idea behind multiple slots is that it lets you get maximum armor without needing a composite armor plate. The fact that you don't take advantage of that doesn't make them wasteful.
To make it so that two Armor-6 modules gave you some advantage over one Armor-6 module sort of goes against how all the other modules work.
Now if they want to make it so that Armor-6 gives you light armor, great, or if they want to make it so there's a point in stacking two level six modules of any type that would be great. I'm not saying I don't want to be able to do either of those, but it should maintain some consistency.
BTW, now that we are starting to see droid frames that effect the performance of installed modules (astromechs and LE Repair do less damage with an identical combat rating) how about seeing some other frames modify some of the existing modules, like giving a bonus to the medical rating for surgical droids or maybe a bonus to the storage for Binary Load Lifters?
Well, I do take advantage of that, I just feel like it's silly that you CAN put two lvl 6 armor modules on a droid and receive no benefit from doing so. If it's not going to provide any difference over one it should at least tell you, or prevent you from doing so. I know the difference, new DEs might not and it's just...unclear is the best I can put it. I don't get this statement though - "To make it so that two Armor-6 modules gave you some advantage over one Armor-6 module sort of goes against how all the other modules work." Don't you get a benefit from using 2 Combat modules? I dunno - I see what you're saying, like adding 2 med modules doesn't give you 220% increase, but it just makes SENSE to me. Players who take the extra effort to get those composite armor modules and are willing work for that extra quality should get some benefit. Like you said, there should be a point to it.
Well...I'd agree that the situation won't get better. Unfortunately, the onus is on those that frequent the DE boards to take the first step. It isn't fun...but it's what I've been told. They simply aren't inclined to post in any 'snake pit' profession forums (or other overly flame/rant-filled areas).
Lonkley wrote:
Why dont you think they undestand that? If dell makes a computer this month and sells it for $1000, and then next month makes it faster, and the new computer is a $1000, does dell expect the computers they made last month to continue to sell for $1000? No. They reduce the price of last months computer as much as its required to move the product.
Bad example. Dell has no shelf stock of "pre-built" computers. They build 'em as the orders come in (and don't get stuck with obsolete stock) Every computer they charged $1000 for last month was sold last month.
Can you say the same thing about your droids? 
TheRealTK421 wrote:
Icarus-6 wrote:
While the aforementioned post was unnecessarily ranting refusing to post is only going to make the situation worse, not better.
TheRealTK421 wrote:
This type of post is exactly why they won't 'talk' here....
Well...I'd agree that the situation won't get better. Unfortunately, the onus is on those that frequent the DE boards to take the first step. It isn't fun...but it's what I've been told. They simply aren't inclined to post in any 'snake pit' profession forums (or other overly flame/rant-filled areas).
/shrug
Just reporting what they tell me...
/bow
Respectfully,
TK I don't want your position, BTW I think you are doing a good job on our behalf. Now for the however. I understand that the devs "aren't inclined to post in any 'snake pit' profession forums". My response to this little rebuke is that the forum is of their making. The lack of communication to you /to us has created a worsening situation. Now we see experienced MDEs leaving the profession. These are the very people that have taught us newer MDE some of the finer aspects of the craft.
The only way we may get our voices heard is post these problems in a more open forum that more players frequent.
This is one reason I've been trying to inject some positive thoughts lately, as well as countering some of the negative. It IS up to US as DE's, if we want them to post here, to behave in a manner that will support that. People may not like that, but since one of the biggest complaints around here is that they don't post, there is only ONE way to change things so they will, and it starts with each one of us. That is my opinion, not me dictating what anyone should do. It is what I will do. I will not be afraid to bring up concerns about the direction the dev's take things, or about fixes or new things they do for DE, but I will not drench it in venom. I am not pointing the finger at ANYONE drenching things in venom, I am just saying how I see it for what I can do to contribute in a positive manner, in a positive way, and still disagree with or challenge the devs on occasion.
Positivity and disagreeing with things they might do are not mutually exclusive. Anyway, I am sounding like a broken record myself, so unless I read something else in this vein that I feel the need to respond to, I am fairly done with stating my point of view on this for now.
It is my opinion that anyone who continues in a bitter vein, after reading what TK had to say about why they don't post here, really does NOT want the devs to post on our forums again, and I believe that hurts our profession a bit (even though we have a correspondent to foster communication between devs and DE's, I feel the direct interaction other professions receive on occasion on their boards with the devs, is something really helpful for those particular professions, and would be helpful for ours).
Iree
Lonkley wrote:
Malitevv wrote:
My general impression with this game so far is that the developers have something to learn where managing an economy is concerned. They do take efforts to temper the negative effects of changes if it affects a large portion of the player base, but they don't bother if the number of players directly affected is small. Trouble is that hurting players that feed products into the economy, even if the number of players doing so is small, has larger affects that damage the game as a whole and affect all players. My impression is that the developers don't understand this. And I am growing increasingly frustrated because of it. This game has new economic related features, but so far they are not being supported or managed very well.
Why dont you think they undestand that? If dell makes a computer this month and sells it for $1000, and then next month makes it faster, and the new computer is a $1000, does dell expect the computers they made last month to continue to sell for $1000? No. They reduce the price of last months computer as much as its required to move the product. They could alternatively not release the new model till the old model is sold, but in the real world thats not possible because of competition. In the game world, we have that artificial luxory because we know NOW instead of the day of patch 8.
The smart businessman will turn this to their advantage. I plan to sell my droids at a great discount (but certainly above cost). This will get droids into peoples hands who would not otherwise try the new droids, and perhaps they will use them and see if they are valuable to them, thus creating a demand to get a better droid when P8 comes out.
The DE's biggest problem is convincing people droids arent worthless. Ive been hunting Endor & Dath with mine and they ARE helpful, but ill leave that to another thread.
It's not so simple as cutting prices. The stats for the droid aren't displayed in the deed, only vague things like "combat rating" and "module level" are displayed in the deed (and even then it sometimes isn't shown), and if they change what those ratings mean then the information on the deed is no longer accurate (and any name I've chosen for the deed is also inaccurate) and can't be honestly sold on a vendor. To use the Dell analogy, this situation is like if dell labelled their machines "max performance", "medium performance", and "low performance" and weren't able to change those labels when the next processor generation comes out. Dell can lower their prices, and resell what used to be the "max performance" machine as a "medium performance" machine because they can change the name of the machine after they have created it. We cannot do this, and that is why its a problem. I can't resell my publish seven droids on my vendor as "low end models" if the developers redefine what a600 combat rating means in publish 8 becauseI cannot change the fact that all my publish 7combat droidscurrently say "600 combat rating" in the deed and and will continue to say that after publish 8 comes out even though itmight notbe true anymore.
The RL analogy falls flat because of the inability to relabel or repackage our products.
If the developers understood this issue, they'd give me a way to "repackage" an item I've crafted. In fact, why don't they do that...?Why nota special option on certain "pre-publish" items that lets me "recreate"an item that I have created? Recreating an item would only change the name and serial number of the item. Recreatingan itemwould bring me back to the last "create prototype" dialog box.From there, I could choose a new name for the item. Then when I click "ok" the items old database entry will be deleted, the item will be assigned a new serial number.
If the developers did that, I would believe they understand this issue. If they don't do that or something similar, I will continue to believe that they do not understand the issue.
Consider: in November/December, the developers accidentally changed the color of everyones armor to a random value. What did they do? They temporarily added a new option to all armor radial menu's that allowed the owner to change the color. But with crafters, they knowingly obsolete our products in such a way that the deed and name of the product is no longer even accurate and offer us nothing to address the issue.
Bumbles wrote:
Bad example. Dell has no shelf stock of "pre-built" computers. They build 'em as the orders come in (and don't get stuck with obsolete stock) Every computer they charged $1000 for last month was sold last month.
Can you say the same thing about your droids?
Fine. HP. Same applies
besides, just because Dell uses JIT manufacturing doesnt mean they dont have stock on hand.
Malitevv, you have some point in the labeling. But there are still a great number of IFs in there. Also, worse case scenario, you still have 6 weeks to sell them.
jefmes wrote:
,,,Don't you get a benefit from using 2 Combat modules? I dunno - I see what you're saying, like adding 2 med modules doesn't give you 220% increase, but it just makes SENSE to me...
Someone else posted about the combat modules earlier and made me go 'Doh!' as I was reading through. Yeah, I forgot those add together well beyond the cap of a single module. However they also operate very differently from the other modules, not having any levels but having a rating.
I agree that it should make sense for two Med-6 modules to give some bonus over one. However, they don't and armor, which is level based, should behave in a similar manner, IMO.
Now if we want to start up a thread on stacking modules past level 6 I'm all for that.
Message Edited by Icarus-6 on 04-05-2004 04:32 PM
TheRealTK421 wrote:
- Increase combat module rating cap?
- Tweak/add ability to experiment Combat Rating at the Cluster crafting stage and/or the deed stage?
Maybe it would help for them to know where we stand on this.../shrug (I'm asking them too, right now, by the way).
It should be NEITHER.
Above you said you don't think us getting stuck with obsolete stock was a problem - let me tell you, IT IS.
After getting screwed over by being told "stock up on deeds and chassis!", if I get stuck again with useless stuff I swear...seriously, I'm going to be more upset than I have ever been with anything in SWG.
I have done everything in my power in-game to make the best out of what we were given - but this would screw me over so royally that I really couldn't face playing again.
If they are going to do anything, ADJUST THE MEANING OF THE RATING, not the rating nor additional experimentation.
I'm sorry, but it is just unacceptable for them to punish industrialists because they can't get it right the first time.
Nothing like a game that DISCOURAGES you from being prepared.
I don't wanna hear "greater good", "it won't be so bad", bah, I'm sick of changes hurting so much. It's not worth it.
It's bad enough the ratings are going to change so my droid deeds with labels are going to be wrong - I can at least tell people about that - but if I am stuck with combat modules and deeds that are obsolete...I can't even tell you how upset I'm going to be.
No, it's not worth the "end" result to ruin our gameplay along the way - it's supposed to be the journey, not the end result, right? Runing my business once a month and forcing me to start from scratch is making the journey miserable - and makes the "end result" worthless if no one is left to play it.
AO