It’s not that I want to punish those for taking a break, I just stand for the people who are not taking a break so they can have the best experience of the game.
I’m sure there are many views on this I might not have considered and that’s why we’re all discussing this. I welcome others point of view and ultimately want to please every body possible but I certainly won’t be offended sharing thoughts and I hope I’m not offending others as that’s not my intention.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this topic?
How do you feel becons should best serve you and the active community?
I for one have felt the “punishment” as you so put it within weeks of starting a settlement, attempting to link with active players and build a community with our low player base. I immediately noticed beacons in plots of land that were never built upon. Meanwhile as I’ve spent roughly 100 hours building up the town to be pretty and attractive for new players to come and enjoy or build upon. Now I can never remove the eye sores or beacons first placed here without homes, I cannot change the paths or structures around them and they’ve left the game with no sign of return. This is only alpha but I can only imagine what the future holds.
This is most likely where my bias has come from.
I thought a lot about the whole concept, and the reason i don’t wrote earlier is, because my opinion is split in two pieces about the complete topic. Let my try to answer on all points mentioned by others (which bother me) but first let me explain my own point of view.
My Point of View
I think it’s a good idea that beacons vanish after some “inacceptable” inactivity from the owning player. My main points are:
Ghost towns
Cities of “buildings” where no one’s ever active (nice to look but useless)
Building problems
the core of a city will decay (less and less players) and the outer circle is the only place for new buildings. the outer circle will expand while the inner core of a city dies - no need to go in the center because there are no active players.
POIs
if we start the game we have the chance to see the world how it was designed to be (all natural) in later game states a lot of nice places will be crowded with a lot of buildings (some nice, some not). If you are inactive for a long time it would be “unappealing” if the world is full of abandoned buildings (cadaverous buildings polluting the environment)
Motivation / Treasure Hunt
for me it would be great if it would be possible to loot lost “treasures” long time after the place was abandoned (assuming that chests will take really long times to decay). this would incentive players to roame in the world and search on lost places (treasure seekers) [remember - there are NO quests]
I’m also for the fuel idea. If i know that my friend is ill (in hospital or had an accident) i can take care of his beacons and refill them.
On the other hand i can understand that it’s ridiculous if you come back after a year and you lost everything. This leads me to some questions / ambiguities.
As far as i understand the concept of this game, a lot of progression is stored in items and machinery but not like in other MMOs where you spend hundreds of ours grinding for one item but also in the combination of items, the knowledge you need to combine items and tools and so on. So my first question: “If you loose your building and your tool how much progression would you lose over all ?”. If it’s only the time collecting the materials it’s not a big lost in my opinion because you’ve already collected the knowledge to rebuild (time lost < 30% would be acceptable in my opinion).
Starting from the scratch can be a great possiblity for new and fresh ideas. If you are forced to search a new location (because your old is taken) you have the chance to find better spots or new people (enhance user interactions). “Why should it always be bad to start new ?” I started on 3 worlds (before the C++) and on every new place i had new ideas for buildings. sometimes i go back to my old worlds (buildings) but i would not miss them if the decay and i’d love to see what others will do with the places.
I think it is a major requirement that we will get a sort of “permanent” storage (eg. a bank account that holds items account wide and forever) where you can store your most valuable items. @olliepurkiss “Will there be a way to store items and machinery save from decay?”
“Will machines be transportable ?” If they can’t be transpoted we have an other problem → you need to left back a lot of progression if you change the world. In this case it’s like a complete lost anyway and then i would have no problems with them to decay. If mechines will be transportable i hope we’ll be able to store them in a permanent store.
Solutions
Even if there are a lot of open questions for me (see above) i think that beacons should expire and it should be possible for others to care for your beacon (refill them). If the really vanish at some point in time it would be a good solution to get a persistent storage for you items. it should be possible for everyone to join the game once in 3-6 months and save your items. if they are not worth a single login and 5 minutes to save them (forever) you don’t really care and than there should be no problem at all for you.
Notes to Others
Some random notes to others …
I like the idea of a decay in stages / phases. This would fit into the “treasure hunt” concept (assuming your times are placeholders - they are really short). I’d like to add that chests should “NEVER” regenerate because it’s nice to find a lost treasure and it would make exploring more fun IMO.
they will need a lot more space. You only include the beaconed area in your calcuation but there are easy ways to incease your space artificially (see later). Furthermore you miss the space players would need to collect and gather ressources (i know the regenerate - the question is still how fast) around the beacon. 3k players are really few for a MMO and i’m sure or i hope there will be a lot more players online than 3k. B2T the problem of ghost towns and heterogeneous cities (dead core, expanding outer circle) will remain if there won’t be beacon expiration.
I can accept this but as said before, i don’t think that “everything” has a right to remain (aforementioned reasons).
Can you explain who is minor and who is the greater part of the players here ? I don’t fully understand that part.
Good point. This would be cool.
He doesn’t play therefore it is useless he blocks space in the city core would be my reason.
You can lock in not beaconed space - where world regenerates - inside a beacon (the beacon + a shell of glass (eg. glass) acts as shell for the unprotected area inside). This is also an artificial possibility to enlarge your beacon without great effort if you don’t care what inside (the inner part will regenerate). This formular (where n is the endge lenght of beacon plots inside to protect) describes the beacons needed to protect a area of n beacons plots inside (cubic areas). There is also an other advantage of the “shell” concept because you save a lot of beacons and you can enlarge your building (descirpted by this formular - you can see that you save ~230% if you protect an area of 10x10x10 beacon plots [80x80x80 blocks]).
I also asked @lucadeltodecso if it will respawn random but i don’t got an answer yet.
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.
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)
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…
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”.
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?
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.
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
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.
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.
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…
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.
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.
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.
