Allow Substitution of lower tiered construction resources by higher tiered resources.

[Gunter]

I'd like to have the option to substitutehigher tiered resources for lower when doing construction. This would allow me, as a construction crafter, to continue to get experience from making the construction material as well as for applying it.

This wouldn't change the tier of the affected structure, it would simply allow me to replace a lower tiered resource like elm timbers with oak, maple or yew timbers.

[Safire]

so like 30 slate bricks=1marble brick

[gusi]

I think he means more along the lines of 30 Marble bricks = 30 Slate bricks.

I don't think it will be applicable though.

WhenYOU build a building,YOU build it for a reason. Meaning YOU take full responsibility on what has to be built on it.

Sure, sometimes you don't get exp for making lower tiered construction. But if you really do want the exp for construction, make higher tiered buildings. If you don't have the room to fit them, too bad. I'm sorry - it sounds like I'm flaming you, but perhaps if you don't get any exp you could employ another that does/would.

[Thorgat]

I agree, if lower tier items can be replaced by higher tier items the lower crafter are more and more left our of the game. If a higher tier crafter does it without getting xp, ok, but please don't even encourage this.

[Gunter]

I?m not suggesting that this will make the building itself different, it would still be the same building, but would accept a higher tier construction resource in place of a lower. The experience, if any, for applying would be based on the original resource not the replacement. The only difference would be that the crafter is getting experience for making the higher tier construction resource. I?d prefer to do actual construction to level my craft vice making and deconstructing tools all day or making construction items and selling to the pawnbroker as some crafters do.

[Thorgat]

Gunter I got this but since low level crafter can't replace high tier ressources too whose market would be reduced heavily by that? ;)