One example, because you have the plots outside of a portal hub they use. They are crossing it because it is there not because it offers any value to the player.
Portal hubs are interactive. A road could be considered indirectly interactive.
The portal hub is interactive and does offer value to a player. Someone with a beacon immediately outside a portal hub like a road, offers no value to a player. You do not move faster on it and the player using it gains nothing while the player who built the road gets footfall.
We will probably not agree that a road is interactive directly or indirectly. In some instances I have seen, all the player has is a beacon and enough blocks to have it be 10k in an area outside of a portal hub. They have the plots for the footfall and are not even making an attempt at making anything interactive. There is noting wrong with this. It is how footfall works and why not get the passive income if you can. but to the point a build does not have to be interactive to get repeat footfall or footfall at all. Location can be the key to footfall as well as having built something players are seeking out or using.
I think this is one issue the current system could be attempting to address. They can still make coin that way, but not as much as before, which reduces the incentive for a land rush of sorts around high traffic areas to plant beacons that don’t add anything of value to the place.
posted elsewhere
Tested again with the “Poles, Beams and Letter boxes!” update.
Guild member walks onto guild aligned beacon (no permissions at all) -> no footfall.
Non-guild member walks onto guild aligned beacon -> footfall.
Good point.
I would add to this that there are probably more players that didn’t have much footfall and now get more (smaller places, less exposed settlements etc.). It should help create a middle class of sort, I hope. More players with some spending power, than before and thus more traffic in shops.
Time will tell.
As unsettling as the changes might be for some players, something had to be done. We will go through teething period and get a better system than what we had before.
It depends - if the natural terrain is rough and the road smooths it out, or if it’s a tunnel/bridge, the road could provide a great deal of value.
1 Like
Can we get a concrete answer on this?
Is there a reason why you guys wont turn on the spigot? Why there has to be a reduction each day when everyone is hurting for coin?
Do you guys even agree that there is a serious problem with lack of coin in the economy?
3 Likes
I’m not a dev but I would say that they probably don’t. Not with so many players still having tens of millions of coins in their inventories. The issue might be that those aren’t circulating enough, and no change to the footfall system would change that.
2 Likes
But that will never change tho, 'cos many of those people are probably not even playing at the moment…
1 Like
You’re probably right but the question becomes “are their metrics sophisticated enough to account for this?”.
It might be looking just fine on their end.
Just like their server stats when a whole bunch of us are having extreme lag issues and they check their server status program everything is honkeydorey so it has to be a problem with all of our connections, not the servers?
Pretty much, yeah.
And in the case of connection issues it might really be fine server side, too. There might be a problem on the route to certain providers/people that wouldn’t affect everyone, etc.
If there’s a hunt going with 25 people and everyone has the same issues and not even everyone is from the same region then it’s quite unlikely it’s our connections that are buggered!
Think about the following:
We wish it was the servers - because if it was then we can do something about it!
- We can work on reducing server tick costs and bandwidth.
- We can work on reducing the client tick costs and bandwidth.
These are the 2 domains we can actually do something about. We wish all the issues were here because we can work on them.
But the one domain we can’t do anything about is everything else between the client and the server.
To think that we would willfully ignore domains that we could improve just doesn’t make any sense.
12 Likes
Sorry, slightly off-topic but I just couldn’t resist quoting you to yourself after the last comment.
10 Likes
Last day of testing, results are in:
| Test Subject | Footfall | Repeat | # in 5 days | Days since last visit | Test Subject | Footfall | Repeat | # in 5 days | Days since last visit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 96 | yes | 2 | 4 | 11 | 84 | yes | 1 | 5 |
| 2 | 96 | yes | 2 | 4 | 12 | 84 | yes | 1 | 5 |
| 3 | 96 | yes | 2 | 4 | 13 | 21 | yes | 5 | 1 |
| 4 | 96 | yes | 2 | 4 | 14 | 33 | yes | 3 | 2 |
| 5 | 96 | yes | 2 | 4 | 15 | 50 | yes | 3 | 3 |
| 6 | 76 | yes | 2 | 4 | 16 | 50 | yes | 3 | 3 |
| 7 | 76 | yes | 2 | 4 | 17 | 50 | yes | 3 | 3 |
| 8 | 96 | no | 1 | never | 18 | 33 | yes | 4 | 2 |
| 9 | 96 | no | 1 | never | 19 | 21 | yes | 4 | 1 |
| 10 | 96 | no | 1 | never | 20 | 21 | yes | 4 | 1 |
| Post-211 | Pre-211 | Pre-211, 24d | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Day 1 | 1680 | 1200 | 1200 |
| Day 2 | 1308 | 1320 | 720 |
| Day 3 | 1075 | 1200 | 600 |
| Day 4 | 1768 | 1320 | 960 |
| Day 5 | 1471 | 1200 | 600 |
| Day 6 | 1367 | 1200 | 180 |
| Total | 8669 | 7440 | 4260 |
No surprises today, the last remaining question (if the 5 day timer would reset no matter what) was unsurprisingly no, characters do need to stay away from a beacon for the entire 5 days to go back to generating the maximum amount.
So that should conclude this experiment unless there are still any outstanding questions, feel free to point out any.
The only interesting note is that, as far as I could determine from today’s tests, there were no changes to footfall with today’s patch. So, consistency at least 
7 Likes
I’m actually confused by this maybe I’m too tired. But you don’t have anyone at 5 days out of 5. Maybe it’s just how you worded it. But also I would think it’s after 5 days so tomorrow would be when you see the reset
oops, slight typo, that would be the ‘6’. 
That’s the person that visited every day in the 6 day test period.
Edit: Fixed the typo and boldened the line in question.
Since the test went for 6 days, and that person visited the beacon all 6 days, it should confirm that you do need to stay away for it to reset back to the full value.