A problem with expiring Beacons generates, when people are by circumstances not able to log into the game.
I can understand then, if someone says 1-2 month time for decay is too short.
A solution could be (as I already mentioned in the other topic): people can answer the notification email with “Please freeze my account within current status for x (3 - 6) month”. The first time he logs in again he starts from the status when he sent this email. The “freeze status” should be canceled then of course, so noone could abuse the system, if there is a need to collect something like fuel. Like this noone has to worry, if he cannot enter and somehow refuel his beacons. People are usually always able to read/answer an email. If not, then you definetly have serious other problems then the status of a computer game…
Second:
Maybe using the word tools here are not right. It could be change to “doing actions”. Meaning, no matter if I just move on the map, mine, sell items, craft something. Everything that needs kind of player activity could create “activity fuel” for your Beacons. Like this noone has to do certain things. He just have to be inside the game and do the stuff he likes to (standing arround should not be rewarded, else someone could just log into the game without really being active).
Of course each action should get depending on time you need for it or ressources u use up, different credibility.
i.e mining a block should give same as running 20 blocks far. This balancing factors are already mentioned.
Con: Easy to abuse with dummy accounts to allow for different builds (aesthetic, infrastructure) to last forever.
Con: Incredibly hard to program and code, I think it’d be quite a resource (computer-wise) drain as well. Also, players could argue that them “standing around” like in their house or shop is roleplaying and shouldn’t be punished for engaging the game the way they want to.
Essentially, if I’m understanding this right, your argument here is that where a player gets Coins, they should also get Fuel? But I’ve already made the suggestion that Coins can be used as Fuel. I think that’d be far easier to program and for everyone to keep track of.
For a start lets ignore that the developers are humans and that engines only can do so much. Focus on gameplay, the developers can sort out all the solutions that will take too much work or which will slow the game too much.
Perhaps when a user has been given sufficient notice that his beacon is about to expire, you could give an in-game notification to nearby players. That way they can scout the area and decide if they want to save the area in the beacon. If they do, maybe they could place a beacon next to the existing beacon to “link” the two. And if the player doesn’t come back to claim it, then it becomes absorbed by the player who linked it.
That way, cool landmarks could be saved by the community, but bad buildings would disappear.
I personally am not sure how I feel about a broadcast. It requires you to be on at a certain time and it’s weird, lore-wise, for some unspoken voice to say “hey, this beacon is about to expire”. I do agree, however, that there needs to be an interface so that even people who don’t own the beacon can see how much time is left. This encourages the explorer playstyle to roam, check on beacons, take notes/make maps of areas, etc.
I thought about it a bit more. And I don’t think that it’s hard to programn at all.
You just need to measure time, what each action absorbs and rate it.
You can even limit the number of actions you rate to some core actions:
mining, running, attacking / killing a monster, buying / selling items, crafting something, placing a block.
Really don’t think it’s hard to handle at all.
Noone just “stands around” when they play. They chat, craft or sell something (things you can do standing). But you cannot tell me, someone is actively playing, by standing around.
Edit: sry, discussion. I get a minus point for this xD
Exactly. Each action. Even if you limited it to core things, some will be easier than others. So balancing, especially once progression is taken into account, would take weeks, if not months, to design and get perfect such that people don’t feel like they need to take a certain profession to acquire fuel faster.
You cannot tell someone how to play. Especially in a sandbox game. I know I have no intention of “standing around” but that doesn’t mean we should restrict that type of gameplay.
Is there a way we can vote on some of these permanent areas of the map? Hear me out in this I believe small-medium size built areas should be destroyed or reclaimed back from the generator but huge projects like a giant castle should have some sort of option like maybe a voting poll for the players to decide whether or not it should stay or go. There are some great monuments built by players and it’s sad to see some of those gone only just to be remembered by youtube videos or images on google search. It will be great for players too to be inspired by other people’s creations to see it first hand in person(as the player character). Plus it will be great reference points to use in the game to get to a location just by having those structures stand out in open (the village is near the pac-man eating the glowing orbs not by the ghosts chasing the pac man, got it john?)
Everthing above this line should be added to the Lists.
If you appreciate my work collecting everything please like my two top posts
I’ve split up a tangible concept #1 for semi-permanent beacons. As far as i understand this conversation correct, this is a concept which the most of us agree (in regards to beacon expiration)
@Clexarews: Yes, my rules #2 and #3 influence each other (That there will be discussions in this regard, I’ve already thought of when creating them). But it was the only possibility which I could think off, that does not harm the conversation (thinking process). As you said correct:
I’m really happy how this topic grows and about the ideas we’ve come up with.
@Heurazio, thank you for showing this initiative. It is logically a very important subject for the community.
I would like to quote the idea from the other topic, because that is what my pros and cons are based on.
Dear Devs, and Boundless Online community,
Perhaps the problem we all face is this: there is a mixture of people using beacons to their advantage. I believe these two people cannot be looking at the beacon for an allround solution. Not the way it functions now. The people using beacons currently consist of two main playergroups (and some minor experimentalists):
1) protecting the structures and buildings, which are necessary for the game to develop. 2) claiming resources which is necessary for the player to develop.
I’d like to rather see these two different aspects get two different types of fuel to upkeep the beacons. Adding different beacon stats and characteristics to suit the needs of the player.
The field-type:
is cheaper to construct,
is smaller in size
can (with proper training) be constructed on multiple locations
is weaker, so it lasts about a day or two (does not allow fuel-stacking to pay in advance)
still allows others to take actions inside it, giving them a time-delay that is significant
is attackable with special siege equipment that allows other players to strip block by block
it’s fuel is transferable to other players (using currency // blocks).
The barrier-type:
is relatively expensive to construct, cheaper per block if they are larger
can be huge relative to the field-type,
is stronger, so it lasts about a month without fuel (allows fuel stacking to ‘pay in advance’)
prevents the other player from deconstructing inside it
is not attackable (unless fuel reaches 0), at fuel 0 it will become attackable with special siege equipment that allows players to strip block by block
it’s fuel is transferable to other players (using currency // blocks).
I know that what you asked is not another tool to use, but in the end the world is 'possible with white and black, life and death. Creation and Destruction.
Pros for temporary beacons
Gives the game a PvP aspect.
Making ‘salvager’ or ‘siege’ a subclass of sorts. So it creates jobs: people will start hunting ‘ghost-beacons’ (from solo players), and/or entire guilds can start sieges to economically drain one another.
Won’t allow the world to become saturated with beacons.
When beacons decay there will be people dedicated to salvaging preventing the world to become cluttered with land nobody can touch.
Risk vs. Reward (basic game mechanics) will remain in tact.
If it’s easily done, then there shouldn’t be too much of a reward to doing it. If it’s harder to do, it’ll need to naturally be more rewarding. If it’s ‘easy’ to claim space in a server, and then do nothing with it, then what is the value of the server? And so how much value does the game have for us players in the long run (6 months)? If you catch my drift.
A natural answer to risk is created
You will see mercenary or defensive guilds emerge, offering services to protect your beacons against threats. A natural way to deal with risk: security and prevention.
Allows for even more interactions between guilds / players.
Beacons will become a thing you’ll see popping up in chat every other day or so. Be it that they are hunting fuel or are getting sieged. This allows for the neutral ‘newbie’ to become interested in joining efforts.
– EDIT: added these cons below– Cons for temporary beacons
Beacons might become a first and last end-game goal at the same time.
It could on it’s own become the one and only goal people have to play the game. If the beacons aren’t scalable or resize-able and usable after a decent time-frame for new players, they will ‘find it quite dangerous’ to start their dream-build.
@Stretchious says: “Not all players want PVP all the time.”
I think the essence of beacons in general is: ‘preventing a players actions taken in a specific area’. That has the ring of PvP to it, if you ask me. Or rather, prevention of PvP. Regardless still this can be overcome by stockpiling some fuel for the rest of the months ahead and you’re set to ‘not PvP all the time.’ So this isn’t the con to the concept. The next one however can become a consequence of this fuel-system.
Fuelhoarding becomes a struggle for casuals
Time spent is important to the player. Together we’re going to go through a couple of balancing periods to make the fuel-system fun, economically stable and worthwhile. Because 1) Finding the right ingredients to make the fuel. 2) Production time, and 3) Remote adjustments or actually walking up to a pedestal to input the ‘gems’ that power the beacons (don’t shoot, it’s just a brainfart example), all of this takes time. This altogether shouldn’t take longer than a percentage of gametime.
again i am still horribly against losing your items, but as Aristotle said “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” enough ego stroking. the suggestion. (For convenience instead of saying “in case it were to happen” i will just say “it is” though i mean the first)
If we were to have a time system of x amount of time in which you have to log in. lets say 2 months cause its easier to work with those numbers.
(i wont mention a fuel type, i dont care if its gems or whatever. i will just call it X)
everytime you logged in the bar resets. Now there are 2 parts to this system
A) allow people to pay x that will extend the time with 14 days. The time would start by taking the “real” time and would then go to the “extra” time if it were to reach that point. meaning if you pay X but keep logging in every month then you still have those 14 days. So its like an investment.
B) Allow other people to pay 2x to “refresh” the real time back to the 2 months so the person doesnt have to log in. Make a note on the beacon for the owner to read of who refreshed it
Pros:
-You can slowly invest into your beacons so IN CASE IT HAPPENS you have a backup plan
-It is still a choice to make, if you pay x you wont ever get them back.
-If you know you cant make it back in the 2 month period you can ask someone on forums or friends to fill it up for you.
-If there are some great city/Monument the beacon could be kept up forever as long as the rest of the community wants to pay for it
-Fuel would be an EXTRA system. meaning that you wont have to worry it. but its there for those who wants an extra security net to fall back on
Cons:
-Could potentially allow for some sort of “collective griefing” (even if a person arent on he can just get his mates to refresh)
-If there is too small a limit to how far you can extent time it would become a nearly useless
-If too big a limit of time then someone could potentially extent a beacon to stay for extremely long even if the community wants it gone. ("im gonna build an ugly wall and buff it so it lasts a year just to annoy people)
Within the 450 posts monster topic of beacon persistence we have in last 5-8 posts one important clue = con against permanent beacons: the amount of abandoned beacons will increase by time. This is one of the heavy weight arguments in this discussion, because the numbers mentioned are of experience and plausible, appropriate research. The numbers are quite frightening.
I know the times you mentioned are placeholders. I just personally think that the combination of log in time and fuel time should not exceed the time that either one of the systems would take by itself and felt it was worth noting this in writing instead of assuming everyone else think it’s implied as well.
Meaning if the devs think 3 months seems good at max for Beacons before you lose them, either because your full fuel ran out or you haven’t logged in, then combining the systems should mean you go 2 months (or whatever) before using your 1 month of fuel (or whatever). Instead of 6 months total (3 for login time, 3 for full fuel).
yes and no but are not allowed to discuss all i can say is that the suggestion was for people who needs it EXTENTED and not as the main part of the system.
