Shipwright Archive

1. I would like to see increased factory support. No increased factory support by a 56% Majority.
   84 YES, 133 NO, 20 Undecided
   


2. I would like to see Shipwright trainers in Player Cities. Add Shiprwight Trainers to Player Cities by a 56% Majority.
   133 YES, 70 NO, 34 Undecided
   


3. I would like to be able to convert Shipwright XP into Force Crafting XP. Convertable Shipwright XP by a 66.2% Majority.
   157 YES, 43 NO, 37 Undecided
   


4. I would like to see increased returns from experimenting. We want increased experimental returns by an 84.4% Majority.
   200 YES, 23 NO, 14 Undecided
   


5. I believe resource quality does not have enough effect on item stats. Resource quality needs to be more critical by a 58.6% Majority.
   139 YES, 73 NO, 25 Undecided
   


6. Mark V masses are too high. They are high by a 56% Majority.
   133 YES,59 NO, 45 Undecided
   


7. Droid Interfaces/Flight Computers:




• I would like to see Flight Computers moved to Shipwright. No thanks!42% Say no.
  50 YES, 99 NO, 88 Undecided


• OR


• I would like to see Droid Interfaces moved to Droid Engineer. Even split basically. 35% Yes, 34% No.
  83 YES, 81 NO, 73 Undecided


8. Player City Ship Access:




• I would like to see a Player City starport. Might be nice, 41% yes, 33% No.
  98 YES, 79 NO, 60 Undecided


• I would like to see a Player City starship terminal. We want one of these by a 67% Majority.
  159 YES, 52 NO, 26 Undecided


9. I think decay is:




• Too high. 15%


• Just right. 50.6% Majority.


• Too low. 19%


• Undecided. 15%

---

So, there ya have it. A couple comments.

We have 'passed' a few items. Now we need to come up with a good list of ideas to impliment them. Specifically, #4, #5, and #6.

#4. Do we want this across the board, or are there specific areas (say, YPR on engines or VSVA on weapons?)

#5. Does this apply to all items, or exclude a few (say, chassis, missiles, etc)

#6. Just crafted? Loot as well? This was a narrow margin of victory but perhaps we can look in to ways of implimenting this without a blanket mass drop on Mark V components. Perhaps, as I've seen mentioned many times, more gain from mass experimentation on them, or more benefit to mark V mass lowering subcomponents...

#9b. What is the precise functionality we would like to see out of a player city starship terminal? Travel abilites or just ship configuration abilities? If we pushed for a more intuitive and useful shipwright sale interface (similar to ID), would this negate the need for this terminal?

Also, there was some question as to why i put in #7. I put it in there just because I feel like these are backwards. Sure you can argue either way butI thought it would be an interesting question.

Lastly, but not leastly...

I'm really sorry this took me so long... Enjoy!

Message Edited by styx66 on 11-23-2004 01:10 AM

Message Edited by pervel on 11-23-2004 10:23 AM

---

pervel wrote:

44% want more factory support. Don't think that issue is dead!

Another issue. I think it may have been too early for a vote on decay. People are first now beginning to realize how decay works in practice. Especially this seems to be true for armor decay. I personally regret my vote on this issue as I think armor simply decays too much.

Message Edited by pervel on 11-23-2004 10:23 AM

---

Not true. According to the poll, 35% of the voters want more factory support, 8% are undecided and 54% are opposed to it.

Edit:
If we ignore the undiceded votes, this becomes 40% in favour and 60% against.

While this is not an unanimous vote, this is a clear message. However, this does not mean, we cannot vote again in a few month time. Although I am still very much opposed to factory support .

Regards

Niacia

Message Edited by Niacia on 11-23-2004 11:20 AM

---

styx66 wrote:

Now we need to come up with a good list of ideas to impliment them. Specifically, #4, #5, and #6.

#4. Do we want this across the board, or are there specific areas (say, YPR on engines or VSVA on weapons?)

#5. Does this apply to all items, or exclude a few (say, chassis, missiles, etc)

#6. Just crafted? Loot as well? This was a narrow margin of victory but perhaps we can look in to ways of implimenting this without a blanket mass drop on Mark V components. Perhaps, as I've seen mentioned many times, more gain from mass experimentation on them, or more benefit to mark V mass lowering subcomponents...

#9b. What is the precise functionality we would like to see out of a player city starship terminal? Travel abilites or just ship configuration abilities? If we pushed for a more intuitive and useful shipwright sale interface (similar to ID), would this negate the need for this terminal?

Message Edited by styx66 on 11-23-2004 01:10 AM

---

My ideas:

Regarding #4:
One thing I like about SW, is that the difference between novice and master shipwright is not that huge. This gives a novice something to sell (Especially true for chassis). So I would propose to increase the level of experimentation return with tier level. For novice level item, keep it the way it is, for master level items give experimentation a boost. This makes SW as a crafting profession somewhat more accessable, even for people who have not stockpiled huge amounts of resources. (And yes, I am MSW by now ).

Regarding #5:
I would like to exclude chassis from this. It is hard enough to get resources for a master ship right now. If resource quality had any great impact, this would be hell.

Regarding #9b:
For me a better sales interface would help a lot. And it would negate my need for such a terminal (at least, if it does not allow travel). On the otehr hand, the terminal might be needed for the sales interface. Done right this could be quite cool .

Regards

Niacia

Message Edited by Niacia on 11-23-2004 01:08 PM

---

Niacia wrote:

---

pervel wrote:

44% want more factory support. Don't think that issue is dead!

Another issue. I think it may have been too early for a vote on decay. People are first now beginning to realize how decay works in practice. Especially this seems to be true for armor decay. I personally regret my vote on this issue as I think armor simply decays too much.

Message Edited by pervel on 11-23-2004 10:23 AM

---

Not true. According to the poll, 35% of the voters want more factory support, 8% are undecided and 54% are opposed to it.

Edit:
If we ignore the undiceded votes, this becomes 40% in favour and 60% against.

While this is not an unanimous vote, this is a clear message. However, this does not mean, we cannot vote again in a few month time. Although I am still very much opposed to factory support .

Regards

Niacia

Message Edited by Niacia on 11-23-2004 11:20 AM

---

And if you ignore the retards that have no real reason to not add better factory support... then its 100% for 0% against more factory support...

---

My ideas:

Regarding #4:
One thing I like about SW, is that the difference between novice and master shipwright is not that huge. This gives a novice something to sell (Especially true for chassis). So I would propose to increase the level of experimentation return with tier level. For novice level item, keep it the way it is, for master level items give experimentation a boost. This makes SW as a crafting profession somewhat more accessable, even for people who have not stockpiled huge amounts of resources. (And yes, I am MSW by now ).

Regarding #5:
I would like to exclude chassis from this. It is hard enough to get resources for a master ship right now. If resource quality had any great impact, this would be hell.

Regarding #6:
For me a better sales interface would help a lot. And it would negate my need for such a terminal (at least, if it does not allow travel). On the otehr hand, the terminal might be needed for the sales interface. Done right this could be quite cool .

Regards

Niacia

---

Message Edited by BioBlender on 11-23-2004 06:41 AM

i hate to say it, but due to the large amount of great loot that their is on all servers now, for 4) id increase it across the board, only way we can compete .
and 5 , id say res qual should matter more on everything, missiles included.
6, looted part mass seems fine , sure their is some heavy ones out there , but also loads of light ones too, loot should still be as random as ever, cant see how they messed up so much with it, the balance of good/great/better than crafted loot on the ground game is great

---

bozotheclowno wrote:

---

Niacia wrote:

---

pervel wrote:

44% want more factory support. Don't think that issue is dead!

Another issue. I think it may have been too early for a vote on decay. People are first now beginning to realize how decay works in practice. Especially this seems to be true for armor decay. I personally regret my vote on this issue as I think armor simply decays too much.

Message Edited by pervel on 11-23-2004 10:23 AM

---

Not true. According to the poll, 35% of the voters want more factory support, 8% are undecided and 54% are opposed to it.

Edit:
If we ignore the undiceded votes, this becomes 40% in favour and 60% against.

While this is not an unanimous vote, this is a clear message. However, this does not mean, we cannot vote again in a few month time. Although I am still very much opposed to factory support .

Regards

Niacia

Message Edited by Niacia on 11-23-2004 11:20 AM

---

And if you ignore the retards that have no real reason to not add better factory support... then its 100% for 0% against more factory support...

---

Goes both ways, if we ignore the people that want to turn sw into the other crafting professions, we get 100%.

One of the main reason not to have factory support is to allow competition and give profit / time spent.

---

EnFERn0 wrote:

The average ship requires 12-15 components each.

On your way to master you require 2-3 ships. And once you get Master, many gets 2 more ships.

With decay, the the average Pilot will require atleast 100 parts. Thats alot of crafting to do by hand.

I have no chance at all to keep my venders properly stocked. I won't spend all my time in SWG crafting ship components.

Customers has to fly around looking for parts, Shipwrights turn up prices so they won't instantly get sold out.

---

Where is the problem with this situation? Everything but the "Customers has to fly around looking for parts" seems to be perfectly fine with me. You don't want to spend all your time crafting so you just aren't going toas competitive as someone who does, why is this unfair?