If I could simply temp-mute the offending parties I would, but alas I am given a sledgehammer to do the work of a surgical scalpel.
7 Likes
Well you could mark them for spamming that would temp mute them 
(Though requiring admin support is probably going a bit overboard)
2 Likes
I donāt like not being able to defend myself. But Iāll drop everything so as to not be the one continuing this chain.
You could also try doing beacon types like a cheaper beacon lasting for only two weeks, but a more expensive one lasting about a month.
My last part to this (@Havok40k, @Thorbjorn42gbf thanks for your intervention - it was to hot in here):
I have the feeling that some tried voluntary ignore the meaning of arguments (or examples) and instead liked to start a discussion about trivia, single words and semantics. This is NOT āhow a discussion should beā because one should always try to understand the viewpoint of the other no matter if you agree or disagree. You can try to convince the other but you canāt force him to accept.
(This was my last part about the horrible player interaction and outbursts in here)
We clearly have two strong opinions in this topic. One for temporary beacons and one against temporary beacons. IMO both are consistent and correct (no need to claim superiority ones opinion over others 
) but both are argued from different points of view and are based on diffrent motivations.
Iāve outlined my point of view in a sufficient way and i donāt want to start the discussion again.
I donāt think we should add to much complexity into singel functions, like special functions guild beacons with special permissions or in a ārentā system. especially the second would harm the gameplay fun for me in a tremendous way and would keep me away from joining a guild or start a community project.
I also donāt think that itās usefull to add items in a mid-/late-game in the hope someone who reached that state will return more likely like @Tuudi mentioned . For example iāve played GW1 ~1.2k hours and GW2 ~1.4k hours and i left both forever and never came back (and i wonāt also).
I like the idea of @Stretchious (decay in stages and a ābackupā-chest) and @Havok40k (collect everything in a āvoid vaultā till they return). Both would allow players to come back after a long time without loosing anything (or the most). Maybe this idea could profit from a little āpolishā and is then acceptable for everyone.
Side Note: This would also be one of the few ideas where iād accept a ācash-shopā. A lot of Data-Hosts demand a fee if you need a ābackup-lookupā in their backups (the backups of the hosts). One could argue that inactive players (and their buildings and items) are something like ādataā that is hosted by the devs. if these players return after a looooong time they can get back their items for a small fee (the devs have costs with hosting their data) and start again (okay ā¦ the buildings are gone but they can be rebuilt).
3 Likes
That would be the only thing in your post I agree with at all.
A good start for finding a solution would be listing all the pros and cons mentioned to both permanent and temporary beacons and see which kinds of solutions that can be found for these.
2 Likes
Maybe. That could also stir things up again.
Iād personally be interested in seeing what the devs are thinking so far and how theyāre digesting this thread. Then we can move forward with their initial thoughts in mind.
Disclaimer: Iām not saying the above section has to happen. Iām just saying that I, personally, as an individual, would like to see it happen and as such I am offering it forward as a suggestion. You (directed at all readers, not just Thor) do not have to agree with this as itās a personal opinion.
3 Likes
Iād like to correct you here as I didnāt mention that my idea for home beacon control block would be there to courage people who have reach the later game stage to come back but to mostly solve the problem that on the release everyone would have access to such block which would more likely end in the massive amount of abandoned permanent beacons.
Also if you bothered to read the suggestion at all those beacons could also work as universal storages for all players to store their excess items, basically they would act as banks in other MMOs, besides being a beacon(a āhorribleā permanent beacon).
edit: I also still stand by my previous suggestion as for the āregularā beacons, to say that I donāt think we should just have this one type of beacon which weād have only one plot to use, but also regular ones that would expire if not kept up.
2 Likes
Maybe Iāve summarized this bad.
I read this, but as i said above
In my opinion, it should always be absolutly clear how a ākindā of item works. If we introduce beacons with such special functions (bank, āvoid vaultā, permanent) iām not sure if this is still intuitive. As you said they canāt be expanded and have a special size (2^3 plots)
Bolded word being the key word here, though as you gave your on example itās not necessary, but we could expect people who put the effort into the game to get there to return more likely, but I understand that could be misunderstood.
I donāt think the actual functionality what we get to experience in game when done wouldnāt be too complex, even though here āon a paperā it might look that way.
Unless having fixed size on non expandable beacon is the problem, Iād like to hear your input on the balancing of this specific type of beacon control block, some of my thoughts on the matter if you scrolled through them:
To add to your concern of complexity of my suggested idea the beacon control block could be obviously made to look different from regular ones, if it would be unlockable from founders skill tree there could be clear explanation of said beacons functionality and the interface when interacting with the beacon could first ask if the player would like to access the storage or beacon management(if you arenāt the beacons owner you couldnāt access anything but your storage obviously). I guess this explanation could be make it look complex too if you really want that, but that is something out of my control.
But if the main concern here is my suggestion actually being for permanent beacon, I canāt see the point why you would engage into discussion about it in first place. I donāt mean to be rude here, but I get the assumption that is the actual point, but do correct me if Iām wrong.
1 Like
Damn, you guys have bunch of time to talk in this detail. I didnāt follow up anymore since 230 or something. 
Seems like it is indeed an important topic, but poorly just for about 10 persons with about 3,5 different ideas of this system.
I wonder if @olliepurkiss will really analyze all of itā¦ I think there should soon follow some statement. Because thatās really a never ending story here Even doing a pro / con list of all these points would be quite a pain in the ass right now.
Iād like to have statement from official site
5 Likes
I think olliepurkiss will be quite thankful for this feature 
I also hope that @james will include some information on the thoughts of the dev team on this topic in his weekly devlog post.
5 Likes
That feature is not going to work super great though, it is mostly to figure out in which direction the conversation have been going, if you actually want to get all the important posts, reading is the only options.
2 Likes
Japp, after filling enough pages here to print a new Bible some statements of the devs may help to cool stuff down here 
ā¦ I stopped reading after something over 50. I have a life next to the forum, u knoā ? 
1 Like
I think just because of the sheer size of this post itās somewhat daunting for players other than those already discussing to contribute. Maybe some of this should be put into a new survey! 
2 Likes
The new thread should help with that ^.^
1 Like
I agree with the comment two above mine that dwarvenname posted. My comment is the 300th reply to this thread, and as a new user it feels like my voice will go unheard, but I am still going to put in my opinion just in case it happens to get read. I apologize if I mention things that others already did: I didnāt read every single comment.
I agree with some of the others about the 6 month mark. I think an email each month is plenty to remind players about the game. But I believe there should be some sort of opt-out option where they can login online (or in the game) and voluntary allow the beacon to disappear and the world to start generating. This will speed up the process for those that know they wonāt have enough time to dedicate to the game. Maybe allow another month after the beacon has disappeared to start regeneration just to allow other players to loot the area.
I am not a big fan of the fuel idea because if we are playing the game, I donāt want to have to worry about feeding my beacon just to keep my home. Maybe allow the players to decide which one they want to do: how often they login, or fuel for their beacon. But that might be extra coding. >.>
Personally I believe that it shouldnāt be based solely on how recent their last login though. Players should be rewarded for actually participating in the game. It might be hard to determine who is actually playing and who just logs in, but you could look for long periods of a player being idle, players who just run around for a little bit without interacting with the environment, or other cues. It might be difficult, but I think players will get bored of just logging in to keep their stuff if theyāre not actually playing.
I hope I have contributed something useful. I am really enjoying the game so far. For an early release itās actually quite pretty.
6 Likes
Hey there @Marlaney! Sorry that you feel like your voice will go unheard. Definitely not our intention, some of us just haveā¦opinions ;). The devs do their best to read each post, so yours definitely wonāt be lost!
It sounds like some of what youāre thinking has been voiced by others. For a fairly up-to-date list of different ideas and the pros and cons of each, check out this thread! The second post on it contains a poll, so be sure to vote if you havenāt yet!
1 Like