We do kinda already have this though. Campfire lasts 4 hours. Then 4 week, 8 week, and 16 week beacon fuel.
So this would be kinda redundant.
1 Like
Maybe the scaling could be less noticeable with higher beacon fuel? I dunno.
Though the Gleam Club does have an option to last 26 weeks, so if a 16 weeks got increased to 20 weeks… I dunno, I don’t really see how problematic that would be.
And about the hypothetic huge square of machined iron, well, it’s how prestige works.
The guy who placed it must’ve had a reason to do so (unless it’s to harrass his neighbor). That takes commitment to make a huge load of machined iron.
More than the guy who made a hut with dirt in 5 minutes, placed a beacon with basic fuel and left forever.
If someone makes a huge stack of machined iron near me, I expect him to have plans for his plots. Otherwise, it’s more of a loss for him to waste machined iron like that.
Well, then, why not nerf the durations for lower beacons?
Don’t get crazy, there, eh. Actual numbers would have to be ironed-out by the devs themselves.
But I feel like a Greater city getting +4 weeks out of a Greater fuel would be ok.
2 Likes
Gleam fuel last for however long you’ve paid for gleam club. If you bought a year, your beacons will be fueled for 1yr 7days
I don’t see a reason to lower beacon fuel time tho. That doesn’t make sense. Tho I also don’t see what the issue of just using the 16 week fuel is. And there’s plenty of mud huts, pits in the ground etc that are around that are fueled by gleam club so it really wouldn’t make a difference to those
What’s beacon fuel? I have never used it… 
I’m with you on that other than for needing to start the beacon
1 Like
Sure, it wouldn’t make much difference to those that are using Gleam Club.
And I’ll admit, I don’t have any numbers allowing me to know for sure how many players are in the Gleam Club.
But from my experience with other games, I can certify that most players are going to do without what’s on the shop.
I also know for a fact that everybody doesn’t use greater fuel.
None of the players I know do, they’d rather keep the components to make other things like food.
I had a mud hut right next to me that despawned overnight because it was out of fuel.
Denying any of this by saying “yeah, but it wouldn’t impact those that are using Gleam Club” is meaningless to the conversation.
Reducing the beacon fuel time for someone with less that 50k prestige would reduce the impact of mud huts. 50k to get back to how the current beacon last seems fair to me, since any decent player should be able to reach that fairly easily.
Pestige is about progression :
This suggestion would further the notion of progression tied to prestige, rewarding the hard-working builder by telling him “yeah, your thing is more prestigious than before, it would be a shame to loose it, so beacon fuel will last longer in here”.
You can keep saying “yeah but the greater fuel is fine as it is”, but I don’t see a reason not to make it last longer, though.
Going by prestige it shouldn’t have to be 50k either tho being as for the beacon to earn you footfall and be classified as anything is 10k prestige. And I only mentioned the gleam club stuff because your information on it wasn’t complete.
I never once said that everyone uses greater beacon fuel not did I say anyone did. That’s the thing I’m sure most people use the basic one because they don’t want to “waste” the mats on fuel. Which then in turn is their own fault for having such a short timer. Also it’s not very expensive to buy if you look around. I’ve seen it as low as 400c.
Yeah, sure, I place the original 4 weeks for 50k because it made even numbers, but it could be 4 weeks for 10k. Like I said, these are just numbers that could be shifted around.
The values I wrote would be wrong anyway. To make it work properly, the scaling should be proportionate to the prestige progress, which is exponentional.
Personally I don’t see a point in adding an additional scaling mechanic for beacon fuel. It’s safer to leave it as a constant so people know exactly what they are getting. All it would take is for someone to knock one block out of their build and not realise that it had reduced their prestige below the arbitrary threshold and they come back to an empty plot.
4 Likes
Mmmh. Yeah, I see your point, there.
The solution to this would be make it scale on the actual prestige value and not the prestige milestone.
As for the point of the whole suggestion, well, I thought it was clear.
• Reducing the impact on worlds of people who just put a beacon and leave after 5 minutes, never to return.
• Rewarding the player who made a high-prestige build with something more substantial than a title.
Long story short, if it ain’t broke.Then don’t fix it.
I’d argue it is, though.
But eh, if nobody agrees with me, then I’ll drop it. ^^
Also what’s the difference between a 200 mud hut never being touched for weeks or months and the difference between a building worth 1m that sits there for months with no one ever visiting it? To me it’s the same a waste of space that someone else could be using
1 Like
Then you would prob be the only one. You want more time? Support the game, otherise deal with it.
Or just use the 16 week beacon fuel 
I’m not sure that’s a solution either, as you’d then need to be constantly checking how much fuel you have every time you change a block… that and it would also be another factor that forces people to build with the highest prestige blocks, which for a builder is not really what you want.
1 Like
Yup. I understand this suggestion was a mistake.
Not a mistake - it’s a good exploration and discussion to have.
As per usual you take things too far - I’ve amended my statement - It was supposed to encourage the OP to keep posting ideas and suggestions, even if they don’t always sit well with others in the community.
3 Likes
(and thanks for the consideration, BTW, it worked, I’m back at scheming 
)
1 Like