Item Deterioration

[Lumin]

I know there's been a lot of discussions on the changes, some of it pretty heated, but while everyone's pretty much had their say and drawn a line in the sand on the tiredness issue, I haven't seen as much discussion on item rot, which to me is much more interesting and will probably have a bigger impact on the game in the long run.

I'm just interested in getting some opinions here. Personally, I love the idea of item deterioration and think it would be a big factor in adding supply and demand and thus encouraging trading and wars and negotiations and the like, but I really dislike the way it works now. I'd prefer more realistic implemation that wears items out according to how much they're used, with the ability to repair a broken item afterwards instead of just having it disappear.

It'd make for interesting roleplay opportunities, too. Right now, if a stranger wanders into town with an 'often-used longbow' you think "Meh. That longbow's kind of old." (not nearly old enough to be called 'often-used' IMHO, but I won't let this turn into a rant...) But what would happen if often-used actually meant often-used? Then you'd meet the same guy and be left wondering if he simply likes to hunt or if he's a psycho killer with a temper...and just in case you'd better be really nice to him. (Or maybe drag him into the local prison for interrogation... )

Of course, I can already think of one argument against that, if the item deterioration was specifically meant to get at stockpiles of weapons from before the iron change. But if that's the case, I still think the current system might cause more trouble in the long run than the good it does in the short.

Anyway, I'm just interested in hearing other people's opinions.

[Pirog]

Time should be a factor but mainly I want the item to deteriorate in relation to how often they are used.

The current system tries to be realistic when it is not. They have for example thought about how long a bow could be used before it would be destroyed from the suspension, but it doesn't take into consideration that a professional bow maker IRL could produce hundreds or even more bows on the same time it currently takes to make one in Cantr.

[Junesun]

It is possible, or will soon be, for items to deteriorate based on how often they have been used.
I think item deterioration should be halted while it isn't possible to repair items - otherwise people might be forced to repair a lot of items in the last minute and even if they already have the materials and time to do so, they'd be completely defenseless for that time. Also, if repairing isn't added in time, people will lose items completely.

Judith

[Pirog]

Good point.

[Spider]

It is possible, or will soon be, for items to deteriorate based on how often they have been used.
I think item deterioration should be halted while it isn't possible to repair items - otherwise people might be forced to repair a lot of items in the last minute and even if they already have the materials and time to do so, they'd be completely defenseless for that time. Also, if repairing isn't added in time, people will lose items completely.

Judith

I like the being used idea.

I also like the halted idea ...but what i like more is how about it keeps going and everyone just gets their stuff reset back to brand new and the people have more time to work on the repair thing , see its win win.

[west]

Most people unstring their bows when they're not using them. ALL serious hunters, warriors, etc. always unstrung their bows when they weren't in use and carried multiple spares. So I don't think the suspension should be an issue, except MAYBE for compound bows (which aren't under nearly as much tension) and crossbows.

But a properly-stored bow (or any other tool) can last for decades or centuries longer than one that's out in the elements (i know, no weather yet) or one that's used frequently.

Frequency of use and whether something's stored should have EVERYTHING to do with item deterioration.

A bow that's sat outside for four years, a bow that's been inside for four years, a bow that's been carried for four years and seldom used, and a bow that's been carried for four years and used a lot should all be at different levels of deterioration.

[Pirog]

west>

Good point.
As I mentioned somewhere earlier I would also like the possibility to for example use oils or fat to grease up steel items for them to hold longer.

I don't see why you shouldn't be able to stock items for future use...it is only natural.

[nitefyre]

As Junesun suggested that item deterioration should be tempoarily paused, and I think most of us would agree with that point, it is worrisome and bites under the nail to see the continual progression of the unrealistic self destruction of bows, and with still no apparent way to fix it. Perhaps when this is implemented, a simple comment mentioning that 'the fixing ability has been implemented' would be nice.

West's and Pirog's points on ITEM DETERIORATION being based on amount of realistic usage/storage location would be nice. Perhaps 'Storage' devices could be a way of storing an item even better than having it hang on some random building wall.

The way I see it there should be three main factors on how an item deteriorates:

Amount used (Pirog): How many times has it been fired or swung (and for blades, actually striking)?

Storage device (West): Where is it stored, outside, on one's person, indoors/vehicle, storage device? And perhaps the ability to take a weapon apart to store it, as West was hinting at with the 'unstringing' process. Of course this wouldn't work for blades, but maybe they could have sheathes?

And getting into a more roleplay level, perhaps 'weapon display' (or really, any object) glass cases to exhibit items of the past...or bland wooden crates to store other things.

And only last would I find that Time Used, be a factor at all, and a very minor one at that.

[watermelonnose]

Another issue that arises with the constant deterioration without use is from business side. A character who wants to make a stock of items for sale at a later date ends up with a bunch of used equipment for sale. It forces a business model of making items only when ordered. The business could stock up on the parts needed as long as they don't start to deteriorate too! For the traveling salesman the problem still persists.

[nitefyre]

Another issue that arises with the constant deterioration without use is from business side. A character who wants to make a stock of items for sale at a later date ends up with a bunch of used equipment for sale. It forces a business model of making items only when ordered. The business could stock up on the parts needed as long as they don't start to deteriorate too! For the traveling salesman the problem still persists.

The stocking up of spare parts is a good idea, so you programmers better not implement that in deterioration as well, or else that'll really crush the Cantr Economy in the long run. It makes sense to have a lot of spare individual unit supplies and then simply bring it together upon their demand.

[The Sociologist]

I voted "I don't care, as long as you can repair broken items", but I only voted that way because the current parameters have made bows extremely fragile relative to steel weapons. Were it not for that, I'd have voted "I like it fine the way it is now."

I think some people are missing the point a bit in this thread. The deterioration was introduced to combat what is called "inflation", which is the swamping of an online world in manufactured items. This is an issue which must always have a solution, and even more so in a world where there are no NPC's to sell stuff back to.

Hence all items must rot, not merely those that are used. So apart from the crucial need for repairs to bows, a factor entirely due to the current parameters, I like things fine the way they are.

(I do have a problem concerning the complexity involved in bowmaking in relation to tiredness but that's an entirely separate issue)

[Anthony Roberts]

Resources Department was planning some form of Incinerator for items, just to bring down the surpluss in the world and to recycle materials.

Toss that longbow you no longer want into it, VOOSH, fry the thing up, DING, "Horrah, 48 grams of Charcoal!"

Toss that sabre that you've used all your life and is a total piece of crap, ready to be broken and far beyond repair. VOOSH, fry the thing up, DING, "Horrah, 20 grams of Steel!"

Toss that broken iron shield into the machine, VOOSH, fry the thing up, DING, "Horrah, 63 grams of Iron!"

That's what -I- wanted.

Sure, deteroriation for when you USE an item, and be able to have it BREAK rather than dissapear. Once it breaks, it's junk, right? And if you can't sell it, or give it away, it's junk, right? Or once it passes the point where it's so broken, it would be cheaper to make a new object, it's junk, right? So just toss em in the Incinerator, heat it up with some coal or summin', and out pops your recycled materials that you could use on something else!

Example:

Your sabre is near the breaking point, however, in order to repair it, you need 200 steel. Why waste 200 steel on repairing your sabre, when you can toss in it the bloody machine, melt it and get 40 steel back, and use that 40 steel with 100 steel from your own supplys, and make a new sabre. (Under the assumption that a sabre is made from 140 grams of steel... which I don't think it is.)

I think an Incinerator would be a good idea, you could recycle materials from things you no longer need to be used on things you do, and it would help to destroy that excess in items in the world, plus it would make the world a cleaner place! (Except for the air pollution, but screw you!)

Good idea? Yeah? If we like it, we can nag Programming for it.

Well, we don't NEED programming. Resources has the ability to make a new project for EVERY item in the game... but that would be stupid, right? Let's pretend there are 200 items in the game. Do you want to scroll through 200 machine projects to find the right one? "Recycle a Longbow" might be down near the bottom or something... So yeah, maybe get Programming to add a button beside objects, so that when you press it, it checks for an Incinerator in the room, and if it's not in use already, it starts a new projects for you to burn up that object.

Plus, it could be used to destroy notes as well. Those older notes. And we wouldn't have that problem with bodies (Press the bury body, and it dissapears and you can forget about it. If you pressed the button to destroy the note, it would dissapear, sure, but you'd need to finish the project first before you could destroy the next one.)

[kroner]

what the sociologist said.

without deterioration, cantr is not a sustainable game. eventually you need objects to start disappearing or there would have to be a reset when things got too out of control.

at Anthony> what you suggested won't stop the slow but steady march towards just having too much stuff. sure some resources are lost in the process you described, but if it's optional it won't be enough.

[Anthony Roberts]

Well, I never said items wouldn't break down on their own accord.

I like the detroriation idea if the item is outside, inside, on hand, being used, etc.

But if you combine that and the incinerator...

...it just might be worthwile, no?

[kroner]

yeah, i'm not saying the incinerator thing is a bad idea.
it could be good. would you need a machine to do it or could anyone just take apart there stuff into its materials (at a loss of course)?