Prestigious beacons could regen more slowly but if standard total regen is 1 day, then any more than a week for a prestigious beacon is too long IMO.
This supports the scavenger and the preservationist making use of the build but without counteracting the spirit of the current game mechanics too much. (Again IMO)
The ruins idea is also intriguing and I’d support that, too. But players who save a build could leave/designate it as ruins, too.
there was not one of the reassons why forgeing was so jankey at the start was due to the fact the machine was added to the last week of EA but was unusable till a few weeks after live
someting else to keep in mind in faver of op is the game gets atlest 2 review a week like this
the recent and all are starting to move towards mixed this alone signals that the current beacon system really needs a rework i also see it on the steam forums all the time of people quiting cuz IRL stuff comes up and they are unable to refuel and just lose the will to play when they come back with nothing left.
Which is absolutely not surprising me.
And I think that, to the devs, players who quit the game and leave a negative review online are a WAY bigger problem than players who ‘litter’ the world with their builds.
My suggestion would fix the bigger problem, create new dynamics for the community and, yes, add a minor annoyance for some players.
Though, both problems are linked to the beacon system.
Yeh! This is a great idea!! As long as you can forceregen it with bombs so that cleaning the landscape wont be impossible if you want to use the space of such a place without taking it down brick by brick.
I like the idea, it may help against quick regeneration, but I don’t think it helps against the discussed disappointment from losing builds and materials. Reading the discussion, mostly we see it as opportunity for treasure hunting or complete overtaking.
One possible way would be the private planets, which could be without any regen and keep all your stuff indefinitely or buying a Virtual Storage accessible by all Alts providing easier access to your possessions and also protecting these in case of “Regeneddon”.
Remove the reasons people keep builds that was not their house or serving a specific function and you will start to lower the “ghost town” look and feel. One of those reasons? Footfall. So much of the builds and roads that sit around to create a ghost town are the result of people wanting the beacon for footfall.
Additionally, the lack of enough player numbers creates the ghost town feel among the various other factors.
I don’t think anything of this is the result of the “beacon system.” That works pretty well in the ability to claim and hold land…
You’re saying that as if it was bad to build more than a house or functionnal things.
What about people who wanna make art?
I’m not making much footfall with my build. It will likely never be capital of my world.
But I still build stuff because I think they would look cool. I keep building because I wanna see how far I can spread the styles and patterns I made.
But that is not what I am talking about. You didn’t quote the key part of my comment - “Remove the reasons”
That picture and your build is a great piece of art. You know how I respected and valued it because of my private message to you. I am fine with art or other build types. I love those that build and am fine with that.
When you go away, though, I don’t know that your build should stay no matter how pretty it is. What happens currently is either someone will grab and take all the stuff (which could be fast or slow) or they will grab it and hope to make some footfall off of it. A few might grab it and just keep it because they love it or don’t want to go away.
All of those are reasons based on the value the person sees in that build. The more reasons the more builds that stay around and contribute to the “ghost town” feel. Remove the footfall reason and then we only have 2 reasons left which means less builds stay around.
I don’t like the “ghost town” feel either and during EA saw a variety of reasons on what it existed. Even after the big beacon apocalypse where we had hundreds of beacons expiring in the course of days we saw most cities areas not change one bit because people grabbed the spot for the perceived value it had. For me, that issue and considering the larger dynamic and model of this game I do not feel that builds should stay around after people go away unless someone is going to actually use it. I think prestige and footfall are bad dynamics and help contribute to the ghost town feel as well.
TBH, I never liked the idea of working on an artsy build while thinking “this is going to disappear when I stop playing the game”. I like the idea that you might be able to make some mediocre and it washes away, but if you make something great, it stays.
That’s how it is on Creativerse. I made something that people liked. It’s still there, they put in a place a program for builds to not be removed. And you don’t have to pay a sub for that.
As a builder I completely get that feeling and idea. That is why I am not sure myself. Right now in the game design it is seen as it goes away unless some other person takes over the responsibility of the build. It is very easy to give a person or guild permissions and allow it to stay fueled forever even if the original owner is gone.
In the MMO type way they want this game I’m just not sure if perm stuff makes sense in any other way… Personally I would just need more conversation especially since I am also the type of person that believes in impermanence and sees the beauty in change and letting things come and go… it is how nature works even if in some cases things might go a very long time… but even a star will change at some point.
Just had a thought. What if there was a support option to petition the devs to transform your build into a ruins. The devs look into it and vote. If approved, you lose all control of it and it becomes a permanent fixture.
Well what you quoted was from another person but from my view I think that maybe that could make sense on a dungeon level. I’d want a lot more discussion about keeping player builds on a normal level. I might be interested in the idea but don’t see how it can make sense since a build is subjective and I don’t think that is a smart way to start taking things…
As an example people love floating pixel art. I don’t for most of them…
I agree about the troubles of subjectivity. My direction of thought there was that if the devs could “shape” what ruins remain, they might be able to more accurately promote the universe they envision.
Yeah maybe I need to focus more on the “ruins” aspect of the comment. If the build was potentially really deconstructed and turned into more of a real ruins feel then it might be interesting. I think we all do agree that we need more in game assets and certainly miss seeing enough more details assets instead of simple hands, skeletons, etc that we have now.