Dosent multi beacon plotting to increase footfall already happen anyway? What would chance?
So I put my roads that merge a far away settlement on an alt, and my compact build on another character. So I still get the benefits of the larger prestige because of the merge using a long road and now I get a bonus for the main build. How am I out anything and how did the system work to reduce sprawl?
1 Like
Perhaps there could be a footfall multiplier tied to beacon compactness, with uncompact beacons recieving a reduction in footfall (one that isnt just a flat 0 footfall), with compact beacons instead getting a bonus as I suggested.
The main addition I was mentioning however was the higher weight to beacons plotted next to other beacons, which can benefit actual settlement roads while punishing the stretched out roads.
So we further reward players using alts as a footfall multiplier already and the players using a single character are left out. I am not sure any solution (or any new or revised mechanic) should reward using alts versus not using alts. The whole point in cool down periods for skill sets was to try and balance alts and skill sets. This definitely gives using alts a bonus. You can boost your own footfall even more with them now. I know some players are using this now, but if asked I would say it is an exploit already.
1 Like
The fact you can gain footfall from multiple alts in a settlement means theres always been an advantage using them. Providing a bonus to compact beacons shouldnât change the % of how much more coin someone else makes unless your own beacon is uncompact.
In the end my suggestions were only posted in order to try and solve the issue of half the actual settlements in the game being made invalid due to the way theyâve made there roads (not the snaking kind, but the kind that go around buildings within the settlement)
Short of abandoning this system and using a new one to solve snaking, I donât see how the issue of legitimate (read: not snaking) settlement roads being made invalid can be solved
maybe calculating the prestige density in âroadâ plots instead of beacon to determine if the plots have a purpose. The snaking beacons that are just there to reserve large chunks of land could be flagged because the areas that are not compact will have no prestige.
So a marble road is good and a wood road is bad because the marble had higher prestige? Or the players that reserve areas just dump blocks to reach enough prestige so that they are not flagged. I think there have been enough instances of prestige dumping in game to show that may not be the best way to discourage reserving land.
1 Like
If I understand what youâre saying correctly, this already exists in the first iteration of the system as presented.
In fact as it turned out the same shapes (a 5x5 with an extension of 2x25+ plots adjacent and a series of 4x45 through 4x99 shaped beacons) was able to be extend further by being split into two touching beacons rather than being a single solid beacon.
1 Like
My idea was each plot in an uncompact area would need a certain amount of prestige to not trigger the system blocking large amounts of reservations. The threshold could easily be set to allow wood or stone blocks that have been placed. The idea being that if you are going to plot like that you have to put some work in to it.
Just thinking about it some more, I think the way james presented it is okay to me. I feel like this is more of a way to maximize space on planets or servers so more people can fit on each world.
But not entirely sure. Just thinking.
So it sounds like they are okay with roads and all settlements extensions as long as itâs not preventing others from settling.
2 Likes
They have already stated they will monitor for players using multiple beacons to bypass the system. So they know about the work around and will have handle these manually I guess. Which I do find less than ideal. But I will say I have seen no suggestions from players unhappy with the system on preventing the sprawl from happening. I have seen suggestions to incent players to be compact but that very different than preventing sprawl to begin with.
1 Like
I think everyone being told âplot as much as you want & plot what you might want in the futureâ, plus the buffer system might have made some people spread out a bit more than they were planning to, originally. Actually, I know a handful of people that did & wouldnât have otherwise.
Devilâs advocate - if they force players to reel in their plots, wouldnât players spend less irl $ on plots/cubits? Maybe not.
I hope rental planets & possibly character cosmetics/customizations (even though not spoken of) would help bring in $$ & players.
I think this system could act as training wheels for new players, guiding them on how to plot more densely.
6 Likes
They will either spend less or spend more in order to fill in the gaps. It could go either way.
3 Likes
I donât see a big deal with this update besides a valuable one for the future of boundless. I had a worry I wouldnât be able to extend out through people (like my road) but if people are next to me it compacts the beacon. Allowing me to extend. So itâs a win win for everyone.
2 Likes
The devs want to increase compactness of our builds, not increase footfall.
Uncompact builds are either a planned extension of a high traffic site. Weâve seen Nova Golda, DK Mall and Gyosha Mall mentioned in this thread. There, the owner would just leave the portals on a new, compact beacon and not change anything else. The only effect the patch would have is that they get 20% more footfall.
The other uncompact builds are massive land grabs or world roads which, most likely, donât produce meaningful footfall. Why should they care about a 20% increase of nearly nothing? The effect is that they would change nothing.
An other option mentioned was more plots if you build compact⊠again, the people who do these massive land grabs or world roads already have a ton of plots, otherwise they wouldnât be able to build in such a massive scale. Why would you give these people more plots?
3 Likes
I donât think asking people to fill in blank spaces is terrible - if they were just using blank spaces and reservations to camp spots.
2 Likes
I think the compact rules are just an attempt to reduce a problem the plot reservation system caused. That people are buying a lot fewer cubits for plots because now one plot of a line reserves five plots.
Instead of adding new rules that hurt some people I feel they should remove the plot reservations and instead use the opt in/opt out of merging or joining a settlement as some people have suggested.
2 Likes
The 90Âș gods are pleased.
3 Likes