Beacon Protection system v2

Just this one in the left down corner.

Anyway, founding a city should not be a problem for rich people. And a city should not be founded if you can’t keep it strong and alive. If you can’t afford removing abandoned plots you should rather make a settlement like this than a City.

1 Like

A fair point. I just want to clarify, I like the idea, I’m just pointing out possible problem scenarios :slight_smile:

I made a few edits to the previous post after your reply.

3 Likes

there are some good ideas here. I like. :sunglasses:

I feel like the core concept of the idea is really good, and to my opinion the best idea proposed at this moment.

The specifics can be worked out and balanced, say the time it takes for a plot to be removed, the materials required, etc.

With the suggested model, there would need to be 8 weeks minimum since the player last played (2 months), for a plot to disappear. 2 weeks for the actively protected state to end, and 6 weeks for the discharging state, and the use of titanium to vote and to suck the energy out in the vanishing state. That’s the minimun, now consider the maximun time it will not vanish, considering no one interferes, it would be 14 months (1 year and 2 months), tell me who can be upset if there plot is no longer there after 14 months of not playing or logging in the game?

What wasn’t mentioned and what I have to clarify, is that we don’t want the things inside the beacon to disappear, we just want the place to be empty for the use of others. All the items inside will return to their owner.

What ways are there to prevent to be voted down or for the beacon to disappear? Well, there’s to log in every two weeks and get 8 weeks worth of protection or for someone to use a guardian’s marker, that also gives you 8 more weeks of protection. I believe 2 months is plenty, log in every two months and you’re protecting your place, considering that someone else really wants to get you out of there.

And now on the topic of trolls, sadly they will always come and troll, what we can do is to implement ways to mitigate it, like the guardian marker, which gives time, and the cost of trolling.

1 Like

That’s actually my settlement (obviously other people, I’m just the one most active on the forums)

We have issues with abandoned plots as well. I have one directly above a tunnel that’s only not replaced because of player persitance. So while this would be a partial solution to abandoned cities, just having builds next to each other, instead of on a city layout, but even we have issues

My only problem with this is; who decides what is ugly and what is not. Even if several people find it ugly it can still be someone’s pride. Although I think somehow city/guild founders should be able to set a theme if they want on which people should obey. Maybe what materials to use and what not…

However if it is obvious unfinished/abandoned or like just pillars of dirt or something I agree fully.

6 Likes

very interesting ideas… i like most of them… but griefing goes both ways… just imagine a grieffer that builds using a beacon for each plot? now to get rid the ugly thing you have to spend resources on each beacon to try and clean it up… at which point he/she just logs on and undoes all that work! You could code it so that beacons can be lumped together if they are from the same person… at which point they only have to leave spaces (making even more land unusable!)

This is such a complex issue it would be nice if there was a simple answer… i think a fuel / activity system may be the most viable…

This really leaves your temple high and dry BUT that issue i think would be better solved with the up coming guild system and guild plots ^^

2 Likes

You’ve got my vote! Some brilliant concepts in here, could definitely use some tweaking but player moderation for beacons with a very long inactive expiry time is my favourite solution.

True, the issues always being the bad traits in people lol.

The only problem with an activity based system, would be players logging in and just been afk. And with the fuel system, people complaining all the time, about how expensive it is to keep their beacons up, there will always be complaints.

You don’t know how much I’m waiting for guilds…

2 Likes

This can be solved with a some code that groups beacons within an area (just for this moderation purpose, as long as they’re low prestige/empty)

Edit: oops sorry pretty much copied what you said

im not sure if fuel system would work any better against griefer who decides to block your beacon at all cost. he just fuels hes beacon what blocks yours and now there’s no other solution for this than wait and hope that he give up first. with karokendo’s idea there would be ways to get rid off hem, get some help from friend and vote. but what prevent hem doing it again after you got the beacon out? at that point the only solution would be report system for trolls (after he got voted/reported due to trolling it would timeout hem/her to place beacons again for a certain time, if he does it again next timeout would be longer.

My concern is the price, I have 3 abandoned beacons, 2 are a single plot and one has 2 plots to get rid of right in the middle of my area - and I’ve found 2 titanium in my 250 hours, and I mine a lot on all planets.

So I can either wait 8 months for the beacons to disappear themselves, do they even disappear themselves?

Or it might take me 2000 + hours to find the titanium myself?

Or if its a bigger plot to remove of 3-10 I have to talk 3 of my friends into spending their titanium? I don’t think this benefits solo players.

I know the concerns are when a large number of people get together to build a large structure and a few of them might leave - but in 1.0 people will be in your guild - so you’ll have 1 single guild beacon to fuel and you’ll use guild plots for something like that. I am guessing any guild members you allocate will be able to fuel guild beacons.

Guild beacons it won’t matter who joins or leaves your guild or goes inactive as long as there’s a leadership team to fuel. As far as I know you can join as many guilds as you want so a project like the Oort temple could be done with us all donating plots to the Oort Temple guild - You would then have 1 huge project connected to only 1 guild beacon.

I think a better form of beacon “fuel” would be decaying prestige.

If we go with player moderation and eventual expiration times, the expiration could be shorter for beacons with low prestige.

If the required amount of “votes” and expiration time is relative to prestige, those little abandoned plots can be removed much quicker.

I’m not sure about the requirement of titanium, there could be a couple of different recipes with varying costs if you want to use gold or gems instead.

1 Like

I completely agree with you here! To clarify I really like the concepts behind Karokendo’s system… I also like “parts” of an activity / fuel system… (a hybrid system would also be interesting (as in activity protects for weeks/months but fuel could be added for longer effect))

at any rate some way to deal with grifing needs to be in place AS WELL AS a system that allows for long forgotten plots to be returned to the wild

It would be poetic if there were one system that solved both of these issues BUT the problem may be solved better by 2 independent systems?

I also feel its important for a way for unrelated players to to help maintain plots they like and even the portals they frequent… i have already been stranded on a planet due to the portal not being maintained >< Lesson Learned there O.o lol

As others have said here and elsewhere: ANY system will have its pro and cons and unfortunately not everyone will like the implemented system no matter what it is =(

Also try and imagine that you are enjoying your game… playing with others in a community… and then you get an email that basically says your neighbors hate your creations and want them removed?

its kinda a cold way to find out that you don’t fit in the community as well as you might have thought. =/[quote=“Wichall, post:18, topic:6835”]
I think a better form of beacon “fuel” would be decaying prestige.
[/quote]

Interesting idea ^^
makes me wander what the “secret equation” for prestige is and how easily it could be gamed / exploited

1 Like

It’s hard to say to someone that you don’t like what they’re building and not hurt their feelings, but as hard as it is, it holds some truth.

As any community game, differences arise, how we find a way to be civil about it and accept that sometimes your ideas are not in accordance to someone else is important.

That’s why something as powerful as the beacon has to be balanced, and what you’re suggesting seems like a good idea. I don’t think we can make a simple system for this, it has to be somewhat complex

It’s a very well thought out system, but I’m happy to wait to see the specifics of what the devs have been working on. From a logistical standpoint this seems fairly complex (even if it wouldn’t be in practice) and I could see it being difficult to get that information to the average player. Don’t take this as criticism, just giving you some feedback.

5 Likes

Really interesting to read @Karokendo - thanks for taking the time to propose and share this. It’s definitely something I’m going to discuss with the designers.

Whilst reading it I was thinking the same as @DanBeforeTime that it’s quite complex. It’s complex because it’s trying a complex problem. It’s not always easy to find simple solutions to complex problems. I would definitely look for ways to simplify the proposed solution whilst retaining the most essential features.

11 Likes

I don’t like the idea of removing anything that is built to some extent. I haven’t had much encounters with bigger builds that are abandoned, and I think mostly the one-plot-nothing-built-on-it type are the problem. I see those all around. Fot that type it would be probably the best if it would be possible to remove them almost automatically like when other player initiates removal plot is auto removed if:

  • owner hasn’t signed in for a month (or some other short-ish time)
  • beacon plot is the only one
  • probably would be nice to send owner an email before removal, give 24h to react

Fot the bigger ones, probably the OP’s system would work nicely (tweak here and there).

My point is that it is not one problem that should be solved with one implementation, but it can be broken into few separate ones ranging from simple to complex.
For cases like said temple (huge builds), I would go with - do not allow removal at all. If something is properly built, it would be nice to keep it, we’re talking about hours upon hours of resource gathering, building, tweaking the build, etc. I think that’s to valueable to remove for whatever reason. One thing I would allow for those would be vertical claim for other players, like building on top of/below that, that would be interesting to have new stuff on top of old (kinda like old cities). Of course that wouldn’t work for extremly tall builds :smiley: And so on…

Check out the latest post from us about this topic here:

I am just going to close this thread to prevent cross thread conversations on this topic. :slight_smile:

3 Likes