I 100% agree there should be repercussions for not following the rules.
Edit to add: I think I’ve said many times that rule-violators should be dealt with by a mod/admin
5 Likes
And I think it is better for the game to enforce the rules for the reasons already stated. I do not for a moment think you believe players that violate rules should be allowed to get away with it and if that was implied I did not mean that.
From this point forward the game will force players to follow the rules. You cannot plot if you build will break the new rules, so really is the issue how to deal with exiting builds as they exist or new and expanding builds? If it is existing builds, there are a large number of beacons that fall within the rules and depending on the percentage used, that could be even higher. So is the real issue finding a way to get noncompliant beacons to be compliant.
4 Likes
That makes sense, fair points. Well, darn. I can see how an all or nothing mentality is needed to get everyone on board.
Why not both? I mean, set prestige to 0 and thus 0 ff when a beacon is uncompact (and thus might get deleted if you do not take any action to resolve it)
On testing there was a number assigned to it, 50 is still ok, so is 20, but 100 is better, why not also give +5% at 60, +20% at 100 and everything between those 2 numbers somewhere between 5 and 20%?
That way players will try to maximise compactness as much as possible, now they will stop when it passes the 0 prestige disincentive…
@james idea? Or are you also gonna argue that this is already in there? 
Like I said before and I will say it again, I dont care for footfall I will be living on a 0 prestige settlement with my roads for the rest of my boundless gaming life who needs footfall anyways pppffffff
3 Likes
So what happens to the plot bonuses when the compactness changes and you have used the plots? What happens to these bonus plots when the are earned by beacon 1, used on beacon 2, and beacon 1 regents? What if the player has no spare plots to just take back which is very possible if they earned a bonus on a large beacon? I think it really over complicates things.
I was still talking about the initial idea of ff bonus, not plots…
Actually, that may lead to other problems if people are trying for perfect squares to get max bonus. Say I only need a rectangle for my build, but it gives me a compact score of 67 because I needed a 4x4 section off of one side. So instead of only plotting the area around where I need, I am now plotting a perfect square every time. If something like this was implemented, it might be better to not have it tier, but be a flat bonus for being compliant.
1 Like
Sorry fair enough.
1 Like
Sigh, yeah, well newsflash, anything can be exploited if you look hard enough…
Sorry, might come off a little un-nice, I don’t mean it like that, but get the feeling no matter what we come up with either the devs or another player won’t like it…
7 Likes
That’s why we keep putting out ideas and pointing out potential issues with them. You never know when someone will take a bunch of pieces from these different ideas and find something, while isn’t perfect, ends up being pretty good.
5 Likes
Agree there is no way everyone will be happy
3 Likes
Here’s my proposal:
Release new planets each with a different ruleset. One for super compact beacons (idk, 0.4), one for medium compact beacons (maybe 0.1), one for low compact beacons (0.02 or so) one or two with max footprints per person (eg max build size per person is 4x4 or 10x10 plots)
See how they go for a month or two.
Then let’s talk.
6 Likes
They had to be Dutch…enough is enough , at some point u have to draw the line and stop changing something that has been changed multiple times.
After this there wil be something else and after something else there will be more. As much as I love the game and the devs for listening to the feedback and trying to please everyone so they can enjoy the game.
It’s also time to stop doing so and set fixed rules ,something that should have been done before release. I wonder why we get all these fixes and changes when this could have been prevented a long time ago. I feel like this is just never going to end and by this I tell you it is killing the game and playerbase. If they were to be dutch…then it was as easy as you don’t like it? Then go! You cant please everyone they also have to accept how it is and let’s take roads as an example have you ever seen a building sandbox game without bridges or roads? No I have not either it’s because it’s part if the game and system. It’s just that some abuse the plotting system by plotting in a zigzag pattern to reserve a certain area this is the main reason it’s not about the roads! Some cry about the roads and that makes it the talk of the day topic but overall like you said theres no way everyone will be happy. This is how I see it, one doesnt like it so Tries to gather more people to join him or her to file an complaint so this issue has to be addressed since hes not alone anymore, the devs not knowing they punish many others in the progress. This also means the players are abusing the kindness of the devs for their own good. The mind is a powerful place and people are very vulnerable to what another person have to say.
So I like share with the community of boundless
Dont listen to anyone that is reading a book for you
But read the book yourself.
This way u get a better understanding of the story.
Because someone can just change the story to its own liking without you even knowing about it.
And accept something even if you dont like it it’s called give and take
5 Likes
I agree strongly with this. Before there is any compactness update, I think it would be smart if we have a giant discussion as a community as to how we can discourage undesirable behavior, encourage desirable behavior, and do it in a way that actually fixes the issues instead of being an incredibly complex bandaid that will ultimately probably not solve the root problem, as it does not address the root cause (prestige). In my opinion we still need to address prestige and annexation and we are just kicking it down the road with this bandaid - we will STILL have to address prestige and annexation in the future. So let’s just do it all now and get it all out of the way, rather than doing little fixes every 6-12 months.
1 Like
Just no. We’ve have that discussion multiple times already, we are even doing it now and we will never agree with a set of rules.
If people want rules then devs should use the feedback they already have and write the rules even if that means some people will leave the game.
11 Likes
There is a consistent narrative that the changes are only being made to address beacon reservation abuse or prestige and annexation. based on several comments James has made
So while some of the abuse of the reservation system is certainly part of the rationale it is not the only rationale for the change. The reason for bringing this up is suggestions are being made to reduce the abuse of the reservation system but not what is being seen by the development team as unnecessary sprawl.
So while I do not think there is anything wrong with a discussion on undesirable behavior, that is not the only issue that the change is trying to address.
Edit: One suggestion I would make for reducing sprawl would be to look at increasing the meshes allowed in a chunk. If you want to get players to build higher then allow for more complex blocks to be used vertically than we can now.
3 Likes
From my understanding one of the biggest concerns from the general playerbase is that certain legitimate builds that are uncompact will be unallowed or even removed.
I think more compactness rating should be awarded for plots that have touching plots from different characters next to them; roads in settlements are, by nature, uncompact, and I believe this would help solve the issue of grid plot roads that are uncompact by allowing them to pass the new system’s rules.
I also think as majorvex said, if players who WERE being compact received a benefit, such as 1.2 times more footfall, as opposed to punishing those who were abusing it, it would go a long way.
4 Likes
Well on the plus side Jiivita’s back!
8 Likes
This is a bad idea because I would just put the compact part on one beacon and the uncompact on another, probably on an alt to further increase ff.