I saw what you said, and I say it is not likely to be able to design the function in such a way it can protect against abuse, since it is player made content that is being handled with, and programming an AI to some how stop the abuse before it happens, i say is out of the reach of any indy dev team.
I do not see how you can protect people other then the good old fashion Police system, Report abuse, and let the devs handle it.
Or do you have some creative way that can protect players automatically?
I don’t see how anything in what I have shared made you come to a conclusion that the answer would be something along an “automatic” process or that I would expect that. Plus this isn’t a one or the other type of conversation and no solution can solve everything with the current designs they have in place. There is more than enough options to cover and solve both sides of the equation.
In regards to my ideas? I’ve posted some in previous discussions. For this thread my first comment was really all I was wanting to share at this point. As I see ideas on how to solve some of the concerns I’ll comment more or maybe offer up some ideas I have.
Because you either have something designed to automatically happen, or you have something designed for a living human person to intervene, or a combination of the both. since you seem to reject the idea of just putting the function in and letting humans deal with the situation, then you must be wanting something that happens automatically or prevents something from happening, which yet again would be automatic.
That already happens. Lol. It happens more with just people WANTING to be mean or paranoid. I know one who keeps plotting in my city. Right @james ? I would love to transfer plots to myself of friends. That is all it needs to be. The first week in the game someone offered me coin for two plots when merika was being built. This game is about free market with of course following code of conduct AND having some integrity!
The only thing that players have to follow is the CoC. As long as you follow the CoC you can do what you want. That does not mean players are acting with integrity and they don’t. They follow the letter of the CoC and ignore the intent. As far as a free market, the game has a player driven economy, that does not necessarily equate to a free market. Since the developers created a floor price with the minter, it is not a true free market. Also in theory players can form consortiums and try to manipulate prices. This is not against the CoC and might not be successful, but is definitely not part of a free economy.
Yes, I can see how this might be the only option in the model of the game and your approach that you seem to be promoting or wanting to play. But, you seem to be assuming that I am approaching my idea and solution the same way. I’ve commented in a variety of ways in this thread that shows that I’m not looking at this game the same way you seem to be.
This is basically incorrect on both points. I didn’t reject anything and only withheld judgement on the “selling” of beacons until there was more discussion/information or better options. I am fine with humans dealing with situations where it makes sense and feasible because that is the only option. In this case I see other options. Automatic stuff is fine as well, but like I said I don’t see any reason for any of it right now either.
I’ve hinted at a few times now in moving towards a game where you remove the incentive for people to do the type of actions I listed as concerns. When we start stepping back a few game systems already promote the behaviors and bringing beacon selling in will help to expand the incentive or make people feel that they need to play a certain way.
We’ve seen this reaction by the player base with prestige, footfall, a plot per character to maximize footfall, etc. Once a feature or options exists some people feel the need to do it, achieve it, or must play that way. That cause and effect type player dynamic is prevalent everywhere in this game.
Just like with the gleam light level changing conversation many people focus on their need and assume that one approach is the only approach or easiest one. As we saw, the individual changing of light per block was better and easier to achieve over the beacon level. I tried cautioning people in their assumption that their solution was the easiest one because they weren’t looking at the larger perspective of how the game works. The same goes for this thread. Stepping back and looking at all of the game systems and how they interrelate is a valuable tool and provides many more options toward resolutions over the binary choice you saw as the only solution or the one you decided to promote.
In the recent post about the lighting no one said beacon would be easiest to do nor did anyone say it should be the only option. Also didn’t see anyone assume ghat it would be.
I think people read into words too much sometimes on these forums. Or maybe I don’t read enough into them.
Obviously this is about a different topic and I’d prefer to not derail the conversation much more. MI brought that point up only as a simple and quick way to try to communicate stuff that does happen on this forum - people feeling one solution is the best because they either aren’t understanding the whole scope of the game systems, the actual problem, or various other reasons. It certainly was not the best example of this but something that popped into my mind.
See below. Least resistance is inferred in many ways as easiest.
And he also said he’s no coding expert and that thought it would be a good option and two options and see no reason to force people into one or the other. So again reading too far into things. Tho I also know Curtis so maybe I just know how he meant his comment.
But the community as a whole tends to focus on one sentence out of people’s comments a lot of the time. Even if taking one sentence changes the whole thing. And puts their comment towards a different objective than intended.
The full statement helps reinforce the point I am trying to make. I didn’t quote the whole thing because I was using that example to showcase in a general way how people on this forum make assumptions or decide on a solution because of limited data, understanding, or the technical components of the game. I left parts out because I didn’t want to detract from what I had tried to communicate from my first post and was focusing on why I was approaching things the way I did with my comments.
Like you said many times people focus on one sentence or assume that one option is the best/only way versus taking either the time to understand more about the situation or the person’s approach. This happens often in this forum especially around hot and contentious topics.
Either way I hope some ideas come in to solve the concerns I have.
I can understand that. I’m just not worried because it’s a game. So many things have changed that is ruining the experience for me anyway I have no control over. This just does not seem like a big deal. If it is they can pull it back. My point is Exactly what you just made. They do it anyway.
Also to your point about the only thing players have to follow is Coc. Not necessarily. Beacons have been removed per case that appear in no violation of Coc. I know, I’ve seen them. But with enough evidence of their intent have been physically removed. If I want to buy plots around a hub right now and post in the forums, discord ,fb , wherever I can and ask for coin or I’m never releasing them.
Not exactly what I consider withholding judgment when you make the following judgements, one of which can be seen as an rejection in the likely event that what you want, might not happen.
So „at this time“, yes you have indeed made an judgement and rejected it as far as I am concerned. if you want to make the claim I am incorrect then it doesn’t matter if you are waiting for something else to change your mind, you made the judgement „at this time“.
That doesn’t really matter to me when you also state the following
if you refuse to state your ideas, then they do not exist „at this time“ as far as I am concerned and also most likely to anyone else following along at home.
I’m not sure your age or what country you grew up in. The way I was raised and use the word rejection on a daily basis basically goes like this:
Person A: Want to come along and have lunch?
Person B: Hmm, not sure. Where are you all going, I need more information?
This is not rejection. It is waiting and seeing before they make the decision. So here is the way this thread was going for me:
People: Give us selling and transferring beacons!
Me: I’m cool with transferring between ALTs. I need more information on the other one first.
This is not rejection for most people. If you wish to call it rejection to achieve whatever goal you have here on the forum then it is all within your right. I restate this again so that people continue to see I am open to compromise on this topic.
I’ve stated views even in this discourse between us that you continue to ignore for whatever reasons you have. Plus most people that follow these forums know my views on aspects of the game that I even mentioned in my replies to you.
I don’t refuse to state my exact ideas and instead to really choose to not share them with you in this conversation or at this time. I guess if you feel you are all powerful or that it is a requirement that I state my views to you, then I guess you can say I refused. I don’t see it that way because of how you chose to approach the conversation with me. Since you decided to call my views absurd and assume that only one set of options is available for this problem I felt it was my appropriate to not go into other areas with you.
If you adjust your methods in having a conversation to something more conducive and respectful of ideas then I would be more open. But, since you are currently acting like a lot of people in this forum, I prefer to only share the exact ideas with people I know can talk about them or with the Devs directly.
To remind that I have been focused on the topic at hand - Based on the few things I’ve already shared here, it doesn’t take too much reflection on any person’s part to see how revamping certain game systems that currently cause and influence people to act in one way could be changed. Not to mention, understanding one of the key drivers behind the “bad behavior” I’ve talked about regarding selling land. Remove that key component and how it relates to other game systems. Then, all of a sudden, the whole situation around selling land becomes less conflict based and doesn’t enable or promote the behaviors I and others are concerned about. I’d then come more on board with the idea of selling land.
Clearly you read it, So I am going to assume this is some kind of strange personal attack.
so If you are going to play it like that, I really have nothing else to say to you about this topic. As I do not really feel like resorting to passive aggressive personal attacks at this time. Maybe at a later date. I am not offended by any means, but for the sake of keeping the topic unlocked, it is best if I pretend nothing was said. Goodbye.
I use to be completely against this but with the new 2 plot boundary I see more usefulness of it. I still worry some people will just be buying plots around builds so they can sell them to the builder later.
Really? If you felt offended or attacked, I certainly wasn’t trying to do that. I apologize if that is all you picked out of the whole conversation. I figured I’ve been pretty clear on my points and even been nice enough to repeat a few in hopes you’d see where I was preferring to take the conversation between us.
A suggestion for the future if you do wish to continue this conversation or another with me - you might want to consider how it feels on the other side of the discussion. I could have easily pulled the same response you just did out of my hat at the beginning of the conversation or when you decided to use words like “absurd” or take a hard line approach to the word “rejection.” But, I didn’t and was hoping we could actually come to some understanding like I’ve done with a few who understand my view on this topic.
I do not put someones culture, race, age, nationality, weight, gender, sexual identity, disabilities, or anything like that on to the table to be picked apart or to be used against the person.
The word Absurd is referring to the fact that I think your idea is a bit Absurd. I did not say you are absurd, Your idea is on the table, not you as a person.
You on the other hand decided to try to put my Age and Nationality on to the table. I am not offended by such things, I was a Hardcore LoL player, it takes alot to offend me, I am just not here to entertain the type of debate that involves trying to undermine the player by putting IRL aspects about the player on to the table.
You can attack my ideas as much and as hard as you want, but the moment you take it a step further… then for the sake of everyone else’s sanity and for the sake of not getting the topic locked, that is where i draw the line and stop.
And because I know select people are screaming „Off topic“ in their heads, this is the absolute last thing I have to say about this situation, you can contact me outside of the public forums if you want me to respond to anything further.
Perhaps then, it’s a good idea, both for yourself and others, to refrain from posting in any of these threads from now on and just discuss between the people you clearly feel are more worthy…
