This already happens a lot.
Agreed it does happen a lot and I think if they add a mechanic like this, it can just make it more common. If the developers are allowing land speculation and they make the transfer mechanism part of the game, I might as well use up a couple hundred plots I have laying around and try to make some coin off of them. If enough players do this, what does it do for the game?
Report the world and exact beacon locations and I’ll remove them.
On another note, what happened with buffer zones idea?
Damn, you will be included? Game just got a whole lot more spicy
But typos a side, great, that’s all I wanted to hear tbh👌 thanks!
Just out of interest, how do you determine if the plots/beacons are reserved for a possible future build or for the intention of trying to sell?
The only reason I’m asking is because I have some reserving the top of a hill that I put down months ago way before anyone was in the area but recently I noticed some buildings had appeared not too far away. Is there a time limit we can reserve plots before we have to build on them or can our beacons just be removed at any point without our knowledge?
I actually had another beacon close by that was reserving a small island and even though I have gleam club that beacon disappeared … I assumed that perhaps it was because I might not of visited the beacon after getting GC that it didn’t activate on that beacon but if beacons can just be removed by a Dev without our knowledge then maybe that’s what happened to it?
sweet. now we’ll only need 36,864 plots to reserve a whole planet instead of 331,776 plots. much more viable!
I feel in some areas it will help increase the conflict we see in this game. At this point we are not growing or really adding planets and reasons for most people to plot. So I don’t see a lot of “extortion” starting up if the feature was introduced. But, I can easily see people using the “game supported” feature to try to push the envelope in any way they can.
We already have plenty of cases where someone plots something and then another person comes in and plots beside them for a variety of reasons. I just don’t see “better” interactions coming out of most of these scenarios if we offered this feature… I see worse scenarios.
The feature can be abused by bad actors… and we still have too many bad actors in this game or people that enjoy trying to take advantage of things. So I can’t support it.
THIS, I get. I feel that concern as well and try to re-plot when things are dead quiet or I do a few plots at a time or use a friend to help temporarily hold them. So the feature of “alt to alt” transfers in the same Player account I would fully support and say the feature is needed on this level.
We need one part of the idea and not the selling part.
I’m sure it’s not gonna be that straight forward. Pretty sure you will still need a certain amount of plots next to the buffer zone instead of a 1 or 3 wide line to protect 2-3 plots on either side.
I would imagine you need like 10 plots in a row to get that +1-3 buffer zone on either end, but the sides wouldn’t have buffed unless you made it 10x10 plots. That’s how I see it go down.
I haven’t read all the replies to this so sorry in advance if someone else has suggested the same things discussed here.
It would be fun to be able to sell plots/builds but this system could be abused for speculation which has a P2W component.
Suggestion: Have two kinds of beacons. The first kind is the same one we have now and it cannot be sold or transferred. The new beacon can be sold or transferred and rules can govern it that would make abusive speculation impossible. For example, players could be limited to one or two or some other number of can be sold beacons putting a cap on speculative activity but still allowing sales/transfers.
Just to clarify that I am understanding correct… I get 2 (for example) beacons that I can put down and use for selling to another player. All my other beacons cannot be sold like that. After I sell 1 of those beacons I can use it again?
If this is the system then I would assume it will still be abused. Now I just use normal beacons to reserve land wherever I want and at some point replot it to a “sell” beacon…
The idea would be to go through a thought process like the one you have gone through and identify all of the avenues for abuse and then implement rules to make the abuse impossible. I’m not a game designer so I’m not really qualified to formulate a complete solution nor to know if this idea would even work. One possibility for addressing the “loophole” you mention is to limit sales to one per week or month or whatever is deemed sufficient to stop abuse. Other work-arounds might exist too. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post - that’s how ideas improve and evolve.
I’am all for this feature. The only thing it changes is making it easier to transfer beacons. Being a an open player economy this land speculation and sales are already happening in game. It’s just not as easy as this would be.
In order to be able to transfer just a part of a plotted area to an Alt, or other character, it would be helpful to be able to divide a plotted area.
I suggest the ability to place a beacon in a plot you already own, and have a beacon option to “Make this plot a separate plotted area”.
Also the ability to combine separately plotted areas with a beacon option such as "join this beacon with Beacon " where could be a drop down list of adjacent beacons you own.
I really wish we could just sell beacons already. Why can we not buy plots that have already been built up. It would give builders the ability to continuously build, and make money from it. It would keep gatherer’s busy with filling baskets. Land speculation is a small thing to worry about when we’re talking about opening up the ability to sale buildings to others.
I don’t think it would even need to be that complixated. It could work pretty much like the current beacon plotter (in fact, it could even be the current plotter). Just stand in the beacon you you want to add plots to, point at the beacon you want to add, and then click to transfer it from it’s current beacon to the one you’re standing in.
It can use the same logic that currently exists to determine whether the beacon can be un-plotted (or in this case, transferred) to prevent splitting beacons in half accidentally, and just include a requirement that they both belong to the same character.
That actually sounds like a decent method that might require the least amount of programming.
And how are you going to handle vertically overlapping plots?