Beacon Persistence

I’ve yet to voice my opinion on beacon degredation, so here I go… simply put- when a beacon expires, all containers and plinths and their contents should be stored for the owner to reclaim when they return. Everything else should regenerate naturally.

The absent player keeps everything they had stored, and all placed blocks fade away or are mined by oppertunists. I feel that containers and plinths should never be looted.

6 Likes

3k players is quite a lot for 10 relatively small worlds though.

There are already 10k who have bought the game … i think the numbers should increase a lot when the game reaches 1.0 and if the PS4 version is released. But that’s off-topic TBH.

Have you seen my suggestion allowing players who have chosen the explorer specialization to loot from containers that are no longer protected by beacons? And of suggesting some sort of end-game container contraption similar to ender chests? I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on these.

Yeah that was the thing i started with at first. but then i realized there might possibly be some rather fancy things you can either make or find. so lets say a statue, a trophy. maybe somebody wants to use a valuable gem as part of the house. or maybe even something harder to find/craft. That is why i suggested everything in the beacon including the blocks. because it would seem odd to get a chestful of dirt if you have that but not the gems you have on your front door.

I think a problem with the discussion on disappearing beacons is somewhat the whole “But what if! (X time) for (Y beacon)” which i can sort of understand. But what if someone came back a year later wanting to get back into the game. I have PERSONALLY (speaking from experience) left a game to then come back a year later if not more just because it has changed so much (GW2 is one of them i can think of in my head) And to be honest, most times when i return to a game after a long period of time i usually make a new char and level it up from scratch but even in that scenario i am happy i still have my high level chars with all the stuff i left them with.

also a lot of the wording is very optimistic about all of it. which makes sense. But to try and show it how i look at it.

“Imagine you could find stuff left by other players!” = “Imagine if we had a system where people could take everything you own just because you took a break from the game”

Using some examples from the survey which to be honest is very closely done to neutral language, But at the same time not saying anything. “Beacons should fade away only if the owner hasn’t logged on within X amount of time” Very neutral language. Very appreciated. Now let me try to skew it a bit to both sides. “When a player hasn’t been online for X amount of time the space should open up to those who deserve it” and “When a player haven’t been online for X time he should automatically lose his land, house and everything in it”. I personally see it as the 2nd option. Not a matter of gaining more land but a matter of losing what you have.

Again from a personal perspective. If when I logged back in after a long break just had all of my stuff waiting in a chest while having lost my beacon i wouldnt really have a problem with it. The only downside to this in comparison to the other arguments is the whole “imagine if you could take the stuff from other peoples build”. And then the people who might have build some really complicated house that they need to rebuild. While it still allows for Removal of ghosttowns, opening of land, Not punishing people progression wise when coming back. And allows for half finished buildings which people beaconed and forgot to disappear.

Again that is all personal preference. But that is still the system I would personally like to see the most. Because that is the system that could please the builders (lack of space, wants certain spots) and RPG players (Not losing progression from not playing)

5 Likes

Pretty big topic we have going on here.

I am with people who want a fast disappearing of beacons and lootability of their former property.
My points are pretty much like @Heurazio :

  • I like to think of running around raiding other / inactive people property to faster collect ressources. Sounds like a fun way to play Boundless and a good alternative to mining and dealing to get ressources… Supporting this aspect with a possibility to skill an explorer tree, to be able to faster enter vanishing beacons sounds amazing.

  • city developement is indeed an important point. Abandoned city centers but active border areas sounds horrible to me. Of course if someone gets inactive I want to take the nice place in the most active shopping street in the city center, to sell my goods there!

  • environment should come back to it’s natural state somewhen. Of course it would be nice to see great artefacts players built somewhere (as @Zouls ) mentioned. But most of stuff will probably just look like garbage and incomplete ruins… “social” builds as bridges or tunnels are of course handy and nice to keep. But if a person who built it, gets inactive and the build is still in need… someone else will maintain and keep it working. I don’t see any problem here. PLAYER BUILDS SHOULD SIGNALIZE ACTIVITY AND POSSIBILITY OF INTERACTION.

  • One of the worst arguments of slow decay was the inability of entering the game. this could be solved in another way because usually people here called occasional reasons. If you have exam time for several month, if a tornado blew away your house or you move to another place… people could have the ability to individual “freeze” their game state for a certain time. Means: you get an email because due to your inactivity your beacons disappear soon. Then there could be the possibility to answer this email and freeze the property for an appropriate amount of time (3 - 6month). As soon as you enter the game meanwhile this individual freeze will be canceled, so noone would be able to freeze property just because of lazyness to maintain with fuel.

I by the way very much like the system @Havok40k mentioned. Kinetic force you collect by “doing stuff” with your tools (mining, crafting, dealing, hunting,…). Like this we distance from “fuel” that has to be collected and transported to your beacons. That would be an unnecessary way…

4 Likes

I think that another big problem of the idea of raiding peoples lost buildings is that i feel like it is too much… PVP based? Like it would make a ton of sense in games like Ark, Rust, Or any of those survival games which has PVP activated. But in boundless i personally dont see it fitting anywhere. Right now the PVP aspects are not really revealed and all we knew was that it would be “Fun” PVP. So in a game where PVE seems to be the intention. where killing other people could only be done in ways some would call “Griefing”. Where we supposedly work together. Why do you believe that taking other peoples things should be acceptable? I guess on this point it also really depends on whether or not the stuff you drop when you die can only be picked up by you or by other people. Not sure if anybody have info on that?

Just noticing how the system discussions went from “Remove stuff so things got more natural” to “Reward other people on the expense of those who stopped playing”.

4 Likes

Why can’t we use both when arguing for non-permanent beacons? Is there a rule that we can only use one argument for our preference in beacon persistence?

1 Like

Yes, I read both of those ideas and I’m not particularly sold on either of them. For chest looting, I’m wholly opposed in any way, shape or form. For “ender chests” long ago in another thread (I’m at work, not going to dig it up right now) I suggested something like that and the community was fairly opposed. I suggested something similar again, but for the guild chest and again, the community was opposed, and for good reason. It potentially removes the dangers of traveling long distances with full bags. @Zouls suggestion of a sort of beacon redemption chest is the closest thing to an “ender chest” that I think is necessary, though I disagree with one particular part.

@Zouls I disagree that a player should receive all blocks inside of their beacon on its expiration. Perhaps it would be right to include machines and props like statues, as you suggested (though I lean toward leaving them behind as well) but redeeming all blocks would leave nothing behind for regeneration or oppertunists (ok, looters) and depending on how exactly your beacon is placed, could end up flooding your storage with massive amounts of stone or dirt that you never mentioned to keep. My castle for example, is built into the side of a mountain. My beacons, though carefully placed, still encompass about 1k stone and dirt blocks that I built my home around.

I can see the appeal of scavenging some nice relics from a decayed mansion. I equate it to real life abandoned mansions- the owners aren’t going to take the fancy stonework gargoyles off the roof, or the gold leaf off of the mantle, but looters would be happy to.

2 Likes

If beacons will degenerate (which seems to be the preference of the majority of the community) you´ll loose the stuff inside your chests anyway. So for the inactive player there´s no difference between loosing his stuff to the world regeneration or due to other players.
So as far as I´m concerned looting an abandoned beacon would be as much PvP as mining is PvE.

That´s not true, looting abandoned beacons was suggested right from the beginning of this discussion, by several people.

Those “RPG Players” would still keep their character progression (lvl), their equipment, weapons (Generally the stuff “RPG players” usually care about). So if you are an “RPG Player” that plans to take a break from the game just fill your inventory up with your most valuable stuff (maybe some pre-crafted crafting stations), maybe blueprint your home and you are ready to continue the game right were you left ocne you come back.
You would definitely not loose everything

1 Like

Agreeing with everything you have to say here. Very, very good point that looting and regen make no difference on the end result, I hadn’t even thought of that.

I still vote for beacon should be permanent…
Only the tough that my stuff can be gone, make me look for other things to do.
Many argument for time-limit beacons is to loot stuff from others…that’s not my game.
I would feel very bad if i see things i made worn by others and know they have looted it from me.

If some ppl want such stuff, let them have it on their own worlds where they can do what they want, but put up warning-signs, so i don’t go there by mistake.

1 Like

Looting also enhance exploration and add fun to the game like i said above (treasure hunt).

But you also like worlds that are not polluted don’t you ? How should the worlds regenerate if there are always signs of other people how build something long time ago ?

Remember that everything has a durability and everything will break at some point in time. You can’t keep your items forever and so the others too. If they loot your home they will receive a “short time boost” if your equipment is better than theirs. No one can gain a permanent benefit from your possession.

Furthermore:

:thumbsup:

2 Likes

I really don’t see any PVP aspect here. Because the players never meet, else the “Raid” could not take place. I just see a smart form of gathering ressources. Furthermore, this is a rule everyone accepts when beginning to play.

If there is an implementation of an infinite storage system like @Heurazio mentioned, is another story.

Why should this not happen? This is the thought of survival and the importance of being careful and think about what you take with you on your adventures. Isn’t it?
At least this is my point of view. Playing in groups is another story…

I am completely for looting everything. Containers, Plinths, whatever.
We still have to keep in mind… this will just appear if a player does not play for a long time… (1 - 6 month, depending on the system which will be choosen).
If I would be the one, not playing for such a long time… well then it’s also not as important to me to lose all my stuff. It would be a bit disencouraging if I’d also lose all my “skill progress”. But Material stuff would not bother me. It’s just the way it is…

1 Like

So…I wonder if the differences of opinion aren’t simply about how much we expect this to be a problem? I personally don’t expect it to be a problem, therefore I think intentionally “aging out/deleting” a player’s work is unnecessary and offputting. Other people are fully expecting huge ghost towns or whatever…and so for them it seems an absolute necessity to prevent the world from turning into anarchy. Is that the main crux? Maybe there should be an option for something like groups of players to form a homeowner’s association so people who want to force individual’s to conform in some way can have a big block of reserved space for a community…and those of us that want to can pick an area to build where we’re free to put pink flamingos in the yard and have a car on blocks in the driveway.

2 Likes

I just posted something like this idea…make it like the real world where players who want can form communities with a bunch of rules about who places a beacon and where and how long it lasts. I just wouldn’t be interested in living there, but out in the real world homeowner’s associations are very popular.

1 Like

I like to wander around and find old sites and ghost-towns, it gives history to the worlds, and they are monument of their own. I like to go and explore the pre-c++ worlds just to see what ppl have built, and they are really ghost-towns now.

That we should run out of nice spots, i just do not believe, someone mentioned 50+ worlds to explore, plus the ability to rent worlds, and new worlds probably added in game from time to time. I have been out to the edge of the current small world, and every hill or mountain i climb up i see lots of nice spots for settlements.

And then it is portals coming, so you can expand your settlement to new spots, or to new worlds, if you run out of space.
If you need to have your friend close, you can allow him to place his beacon under, or above yours, building skyscrapers, if you want.

Only case i agree to destroy beacons would be if it block something important, like a portal, or in anyway was setting up against some placement rules (i hope that comes). And only devs should have the ability to do that.

5 Likes

Leaving ghost towns up to admire their buildings doesn’t help people in desperate need of supplies or who are looking for new places to trade with.

I am going to air my idea again:

What if insteadof the beacon disapearing when the time runs out they just becom possible to remove? So ghosttowns only die if other players metting them wish so but dead city centres will probably be cleared relatively fast.

3 Likes

This is fine with me. Encourages hermits who know they take long breaks to build a home that may be harder than average to find.

1 Like