I think this is relative too… I see plenty of hubs that don’t change much and have minimal upkeep minus Oort requirements… but I also see busy ones. So this all probably isn’t the way to look at the issue or solution.
Yeah I didn’t take that as directed at me. I do see some things as an oppression one one side (trying to make stuff harder on others) and an oppression the other way - trying to stop others from getting what they have.
I do think we need to find ways to keep the game changing and ensure that power blocks do not get created… but that is for another topic and thread.
I, though, have always said that Hubs and Markets are businesses and should be treated as such. I don’t think footfall or wear are the right answer to that “business” component… not sure I have a good solution yet…
I kind of feel that we’ve become transfixed on coin, it’s basically a time saver in this game, because with putting the hours in you can gather craft whatever you need. I’m being impartial on that statement cos I use coin alot means I can focus my time elsewhere instead of hunting for forge mats, footfall takes the burnt of this argument because it becomes an expected income, then people get annoyed because there build doesn’t get people coming to it and it creates alot of emotion. Ever thought that we’ve just priced everything to high to grab coin when we can because we’re never certain if footfall with bring in the bacon. I don’t know thinking out loud again
I made a reference, saying that footfall and p2w have something in common: both divide the community more or less evenly and in both cases players stick to their opinions on the matter and no matter how much it’s discussed no one changes their stance, so it’s all madness revisited.
And I am not all serious when saying all this, all those repeated attempts to discuss the feature go nowhere and it’s funny.
Is there not enough risks and inefficiencies? In my opinion, it would simply be adding more to the plate while not making the reward, itself, an incentive to let your build decay.
Some builds require blocks that are crafted, or even purchased, but then the player would have to worry about those blocks diminishing. It is possible for the player to store up more building material for that purpose and use the footfall coin to purchase more building supply if needed, but that just may narrow the gameplay for those that wish to receive footfall.
It’s a tough cookie.
I, personally, do not mind footfall and haven’t checked my beacon in quite sometime because I am too focused with my build, gathering, crafting, forging.
It would be nice though, to see a bit of extra coins whenever I do feel the urge to check my beacon.
Today in order to get incremental growth in your footfall gains, you have to expand your prestige exponentially.
In the below chart, you can see the % increase needed in prestige (blue) needed in order to generate an % increase in footfall per visit (orange). The orange line is basically flat.
My suggestion would ask that we re-curve the rewards to more closely match prestige gains. An example would be to refactor them like this:
Current
Proposed
20
20
30
100
40
500
60
2,500
80
13,000
100
64,000
That progressions spefically matches the prestige increase needed, and probably is too high. But the trade off would be that you might have to largely replace all of the blocks in your build once a month if you’re getting extremely high traffic. A machine could make this easier, but you’d still have to gather the mats needed.
Or you could opt the beacon in question out entirely. You could set your build up so the walls are opted out (separate beacons) and the floor is opted in. There are ways to still game it, but you also get lots of additional rewards.
I see. Understood. I would disagree that it’s always a repeated discussion. I feel like new ideas come up each time the convo comes around however I definitely agree it can be a divisive subject but that’s how abusable things tend to be.
E: I’d also like to add I don’t think they go nowhere. There was mention the chrysominter began its beginning around December which coincides with a footfall conversation in November I think it was that talked about how and why footfall at release was broken and abused. It took a few months but now we have a chrysominter.
100% this footfall is fine but i honstly dont see co-ops and slides any differently then people saw gleam towers for Prestige bombing or stone farms for XP boosting i get in a sandbox game exploits are going to happen but we can atlest tweak the system so they are not so blatantly obvious
edit: sorry boundmore for the ping i was qouteing a reply but the system felt it was still a Direct reply to you
Think about the fact, also, that this could dramatically stimulate the block economy. If all you need is to grab blocks and drop them in a machine to maintain your build, AND you’re flush with cash from footfall, maybe you just buy bricks from your local market. Prices on blocks would go up, but it would make color mining/farming even more of a vital part of the economy.
I don’t see footfall as abusable: at the end of the day, it’s not made by taking visitors’ coin, instead the coin is generated by the system (funny how some call some builds “footfall traps” as if anyone got tricked and lose coins to visited beacon owner). People do try to build to attract visitors and create coins, but they also have to create something worth visiting, so why take it from them?
Traders can make coins through shops, miners/gatherers/hunters through selling their loot, crafters by selling their items - builders need something for their time as well.
Yeah, I want to give them WAY more coin than they get today. I want the folks who make gimmicky builds meant to generate coin ways to still do that, but for fewer plots and a little more long term work.
Why not leave it alone and let others play BOUNDLESS the way they like? The slides put no one at an unfair advantage as they are inclusive of the entire community. Also, since the co-ops and slides I have noticed far greater cooperation and communication from the community as a whole.
I’m not going to fight over it or anything, but it’s just getting old… no matter what you do in a game like Boundless people will always push boundaries and challenge mechanics.
If the options were: default footfall (what we have now) or
opt in to footfall 2.0 + repairs & risk higher gains/losses
…then maybe.
I don’t like the whole beacon, plot, prestige, ff, coin system. Everyone gets mad about it all the time.
I wish we had leaderboards for most liked places, hand trade/shop stands for coin, rental planets for “whales with cash” (lol), and maybe free smaller “club planets” that you use your plots on so there is zero stepping on toes.
This is why it is indeed abusable. You are generating money, fresh and so clean clean, in to the economy at a rate in which the devs did not intend. The real money generating system was SUPPOSED to be the daily feats and what not. The fact things are priced where they are is a testament to how out of control footfall got and there was no way to cork that bottle once it was undone.
Just like with bomb mining and aoe mining, people abusing the way coin is generated impacts the future design decisions the game undergoes. Whether we agree with it or not, that’s how the devs feel about it, so if they are telling us a system is being used in a way they didn’t intend for it to be used and then they add a new currency generating system to help even the field for those who don’t abuse the system, to me that suggests you can expect changes to that system down the road.
This is why I think these conversations are good to have, even if they seem repetitive. Community collaboration generates great ideas.
The problem is that opting between current or new would cause too many folks to just stay on current with their gimmicky money makers. I could see it as a solution if we also made footfall account linked instead of alt linked. Then if you REALLY wanted to make money, you’d need to opt in to the proposed system. My instinct is still to say the choice should be immortal builds or builds that make money.
this game makes us learn to live among other players - it’s not a bad thing;
breaking it into multiple private servers would turn us into hermits hidden in their own cocoons - it’s good to leave own bubble, safe zone and deal with others, no matter how difficult it all can be
so, hail the slides!!
and brutalistic builds (oh my how I dislike them and how they litter the beauty of Boundless worlds)
great to have those moments when something/someone annoy me; priceless mirror to see myself and where I can be better
Can everyone agree that the machine should be added to the initial suggestion? Also I think it should be a Chrysominter that is re-skinned to look like it’s wearing a butler uniform.
This post is really interesting. What you said about having a very slow wear on builds with high footfall. I love this idea but I have to wonder if it would work in this game in its current state.
The Boundless population isnt what it could be and one thing ive learned about MMORPG’s in the MANY years i have been playing them is More people playing encourages more people to play, less people playing encourages people to quit. This is due to the social aspect of these games providing a LOT of the content.
I bring this up because the turnover in the game is pretty high and i have to wonder if slowly decaying plots (especially of people who pay for gleam club and quit the game) would hinder a lot of the dedicated players. I can see a lot of builds that are dutifully maintained being ruined by a neighbor whos plot is still fueled and half decayed.
This idea would be great if only we could get more people to play
Then it would limit creativity and what we can build in Boundless. Everything isn’t either/or. There are builds that don’t fit neatly into just one category.
= they deserve ff for that 
Everyone gets mad about it all the time.
