Would you rather spend actions deploying waystones that will serve as geographic features for the next four thousand years or would you rather deploy waystones that might be around by the end of the next century? I know what I would rather do.
I would rather get a bunch of rated-only-for-a-century Waystones up,
fast, that would cut down Praag or Mordheim or Drakenhof or Troll Country
within a decade, rather then to spend a century slowly dotting those places with masterwork-tier Waystones.
Because every year that Sylvania remains Sylvania, is a year that a Vampire or Necromancer can arise out of the blue and menace a village or city or two. Every year that Praag remains Praag, is a year that somebody can be driven to madness or apostasy or possession or mutation, and every year that Troll Country remains Troll Country is a year in which... I dunno, does Kislev just get a constant flow of gribblies out of it, or is it
just missing out on a ton of farmland and the ability to settle (and thus deploy defenses on) territory?
And
then, once the "this powerplant is only rated for a century" are placed,
then the Tsars and Emperors and Elector Counts can start going "Okay, now let me shell out the big bucks for the
good Waystones."
There are two different dimensions to "What is the bottleneck in Waystones? How do we make Waystones
faster?", and you seem to be focusing on the 'How can we improve
the Waystone masterpiece process' one rather than the 'How can we cut down the Mean-Time-To-Trigger-For-A-Gribbly-Invasion for Kislev/Sylvania/etc?' one.
Yes, if we focus purely on creating lots of Reverse-Engineered Storage Systems type Waystones, the result is that the Reverse Engineering aspect will get better, be more understood; and thus in the long run, the Waystone type will improve, and you will have sturdy and dependable Waystones everywhere, over a long period of time.
But if we create a type of Waystone that can be mass-produced much easier and placed everywhere -- or, even if they are limited in where they can be placed, or require something, I dunno -- it would still be beneficial because even if you are cutting corners
you are still de-gribblyfying the world faster.
In fact, in certain situations, it might be better to have
multiple types of Waystones available for purchase and production; having a masterwork-Waystone plop down somewhere strategically, and then having a bunch of lesser-work-Waystones dotting it, like the spokes of a wheel, and having a bunch of Tributaries dotting all of those Waystones.
A Tsar or Elector Count could use the tough Waystone as a bulwark or a strongpoint, and then the more-mass-producible Waystones as "Just get in there and hold the line" type things.
If the concern is that "But once people solve their problems with cheaper-Waystones, then they won't ever want to shell out for the
grand Waystones! So we
have to make sure we only present them
the best type of Waystone, or else nothing will ultimately have been solved!" then, well... possibly you have a lower opinion of people and rulers, and also possibly you have a lower opinion of the Waystone Project's -- and their backers or leaders; the Queen of Laurelorn, King Belegar, Tsar Boris, Mathilde, etc -- ability to influence people and rulers. The Waystone Project's leaders and backers will
want to use the Waystone Project to sell Elector Counts the idea of big-ticker Waystones as something that is a sign of luxury or power or safety or whatever. And if Boris and Roswita are told that they can get less-good Waystones fast, but which will need to be either maintenanced a lot or replaced soon, and that they should shell out for the
good stuff once they have cleaned up their home and have enough money for it... they'll listen. Because Sylvania and Kislev are two places that have a
long history of suffering from Undead or Chaos, and also a
recent history of being under threat and harmed by dark magic or mutation or problems, and they also have rulers that are very well aware of those problems.
