Limit Harvesters Life

Limit Harvesters Life
  • Notice: SWG Restoration is currently offline for extended maintenance. Check Discord for updates!
This idea/suggestion has been flagged as Not Implemented because of a lack of popularity, lack of interest, lack of feasibility, or other determination by the Development Team, so the suggestion will not be implemented. Once a suggestion has been flagged this way, the decision is final. Although the issue may be raised again in the future after a six month cooldown. A response explanation from the Development Team can be found in the thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.
ByteMe

ByteMe

Proposal
Give harvesters a lifetime use. Every 100 days (or partial day) of use, the harvester permanently loses 1 BER. Whenever the harvester is placed, the number of days is continually counted and when the count reaches 100 days, 1 BER is permanently deducted from the harvester.
Justification
Equipment breaks and wears out. Even maintenance on it doesn't make the item new again. Cause harvesters to slowly lose their BER over time and use.
Motivation
Obviously, this is to increase the production and sale of high end BER harvesters. A lot of users will use a 12 or 13 BER harvester. But individuals wishing to maximize their harvest will want the highest BER possible. Users will purchase new ones from Architects.
Be nice! Yarr made me submit this! (Just kidding!) How about the harvesters degrade over time?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rowa
Upvote -7 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
I agree with this 100% as long as houses also decay over time and people have to move everything from one home to another after a certain number of days.
 
RoHRemis said:
I'd rather a traditional condition decay. Most people would delete them once they drop down to 11-12
Click to expand...
That would work as well. I had to change my original post when I remembered that we can't trade or sell them anymore. So if a person had an 11 or 12, they would probably just delete it.
 
PhilmorALF said:
I agree with this 100% as long as houses also decay over time and people have to move everything from one home to another after a certain number of days.
Click to expand...
Oh God! That would break my back. How about we just create an Architect (House Remodel Kit) that a person purchases (it could be a complex item to build) and applies it to the house to be "remodeled" to 100% (no decay)? :-)
 
The second harvesters start breaking down overtime is the moment I never buy them anymore. I'd simply bulk build entirely for myself. Try something more creative like premium fuel creation that makes them run more efficiently for a period of time. Unless every player suddenly gains the right to place on only the highest concentration spots it's just telling all the people that had to settle for a worse spot that they're gonna be double penalized because they have to run more equipment for longer amounts of time for less rewards to also have their stuff cost them even more down the road.
 
a change that vaguely makes sense, will inconvenience everyone, force economic activity, and be annoying? sold!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ByteMe
Hey, keep me out of this!
That said, why not decay of some sort to promote new harvester (or other deed) sales? Same could be said for ship parts. Those are also one and done and I am sure SW would love new sales.
As for Architect stuff, I will leave that to the remaining architects to talk it out. :)
 
I thought about diffrent sorts of decay for harvesters, too.
But i could not find a satisfying solution.

There could just be a redeed limit (1000?), once that counter reaches 0, a harvester can not be redeeded anymore.
It is simple, does not require to temper with old code, altering specific values like BER and/or Hopper.
It would favour those, who harvest multiple diffrent resources from non ideal places over those always repositioning to get best resources with best extraction rate.
But it would not cause a "second hand" market to flourish.

If there was some sort of decay that reduces the efficiency, it might give incentives for selling/buying used ones (if No Trade Shared flag would be removed again).
But i think that one is rather difficult to balance.
In any such scenario there should be an overall reduction in maintenance to compensate for the rather huge additional costs for new harvesters.
 
The logic seems OK but I guess OP is Architect and needs to push his sales :)
We can see the same principle with no decay on items for DE as well. A SBD, even wen 'destroyed' in combat is working fine after sending it back to the Datapad and call it again.

Tailor might be a little on the edge as clothing will loose condition on death... But you could argue that entertainers also wear down their outfits :D

I also agree is we put this new logic to all of the buildings... houses, factories, Harvester, shuttleport, cantina,...

Otherwise it would be a pure "I want to sell more" request.
 
At the end of the day - this decay thing could be applied to just about everything in the game. At some point a line needs to be drawn. With architect - the No Trade Shared change was huge for them. To start decaying items that have never historically decayed seems like a step too far for a profession that already has a guaranteed customer base with every character on the server.

To apply a real life comparison like 'Equipment breaks and wears out' to push decay can take us down a stupid rabbit hole that I don't think we want to go down.

Jokes aside from my prior posts - not a fan of the proposal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Malthol
Yeah, OP is a Architect, Artisan, Doctor, CH, Carbineer (not on all the same character). And I think we should "age out" items. I have several million cr invested in BIO pets, and I think those should eventually "age out" requiring me to buy new ones. So should combat droids. Not fast, and not suddenly, but eventually. My armor (sliced and slotted) and carbines don't last forever.

Any economy that requires new players to keep the economy moving isn't going to be healthy and robust.

I knew the idea wouldn't be popular, but just throwing it out to get people thinking and discussing. (Don't get me started on curbing urban sprawl.) :)

Thanks for the feedback and discussion.
 
ByteMe said:
Yeah, OP is a Architect, Artisan, Doctor, CH, Carbineer (not on all the same character). And I think we should "age out" items. I have several million cr invested in BIO pets, and I think those should eventually "age out" requiring me to buy new ones. So should combat droids. Not fast, and not suddenly, but eventually. My armor (sliced and slotted) and carbines don't last forever.

Any economy that requires new players to keep the economy moving isn't going to be healthy and robust.

I knew the idea wouldn't be popular, but just throwing it out to get people thinking and discussing. (Don't get me started on curbing urban sprawl.) :)

Thanks for the feedback and discussion.
Click to expand...
having an environment where you aren’t dependant on new players is good. as Phil says i think it’s a slippery slope and it would have to be very carefully thought out and implemented not just a knee jerk move.
i know i did. okay for sales but in the last year not a ton of sales to old vets as they all have what they need. tough to implement correctly i think as nobody wants taxes and decay on everything.
no trade deeds may have helped a bit but still don’t think it gave any desired result.
 
An overall decay system for every item seems easy and just to implement at first glance.
But there a many consequences which can very easly destroy certain economy sections, render certain Missions / Quest useless and chase away player from the game.
Very much undireable.

So if we want to implement (more) decay, i am for selected items (more can be added later), and very small / slow at first (adjust later, if its effect is too little).

As a master architect, i would certainly like to sell more furnitune and housings.
But i do not want anyone to be forced to move / replace their house and/or its carefully designed interior.
Furthermore do not forget about festival, celebration, and other unique items which can hardly be replaced.

This suggestion is about decay on harvesters, let us not stray too far away from this.
 
How about, whoever crafted the item gets a % of the upkeep/maintenance. Should help ensure they don’t rely solely on new players buying their items?
 
I'm bored at work, so I started reading old OPEN suggestions.

What about having decay, but making a Master Architect crafted repair kit for harvesters. Different 'qualities' of repair kits could work on either different tiers of harvesters OR could restore more/less depending on quality.

The economy gets the benefits of sales.
The players have to maintain the equipment.
Better Decay Resist on the equipment keeps the rust monster away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
SWG Restoration is a fan-made, non-profit, community-driven, project.
Not affiliated with nor endorsed by Daybreak Games, Lucasfilm Entertainment, Electronic Arts or The Walt Disney Company.
Star Wars ™ & © Lucasfilm Ltd. No marks or intellectual property are owned by or licensed to SWG Restoration.
Top Bottom