How "regenerative" should worlds be?

General
21

Man this discussion again? personally i just hope i can get 1 or 2 permanent beacons, as i have said before some people dont have the time to play constantly, maybe even as little as once every 2nd week, i think those guys still deserve a place where they can build and have their stuff be safe.

then for those who build more beacons i think it should either

A) be limited
B) be exponentional

So for example, (this depends highly on how much you get) but the beacon cost would be

y= 1*5^x

meaning that the first beacon will be 5 oort stone, the next would be 25, after that 125, then 725, then 3625. you see they kinda quickly stack up, meaning those who are very dedicated and want a ton of beacons can get it, however it is just stupidly expensive.

My biggest problem with constantly fueled beacons is that those who can barely ever play will have to use all of their time on getting mats for it when they log in. unless you use the argument ‘‘but that depends on how much fuel it needs’’ which is true, but if it is not a bother then why even have it in the first place? i think those of us who sucks at building and just want a house and a shop, or maybe just a house to keep out stuff safe shouldnt have to constantly pay just to hold that safe, that one space. however if people want to make 10 or 20 beacons then yeah i think there should be something for that.

For infrastructure i really like the idea of a tempoary beacon though, it should very much be dependent on its overall size in cubemeters, and something i think would suit it well would be allowing those beacons to be charged by anybody, so if you use a road alot that have a temp beacon and you have 1 or 2 oortstone to spare you might put them on the road.

2 questions that i think is important to ask if we do get charged beacons

  1. what happens when they run out of charges? do they go inactive or do they completely disappear?

  2. if we have a permanent and a tempoary beacon, what is to stop people from using the tempoary?

that might be a thing though, have permanent and tempoary beacons, so those who want to pay all the time can do it, and those who just need 1 permanent can get that.

2 Likes
22

About 2 why should anything stop them from using the temporary beacon? If they want to put up with the maintenance instead of using a permanent beacon, why shouldn’t they be able to?

23

Yeah that is what i got to, it was in terms of seeing temp beacons as only for infrastructure :smile:’

maybe they add specialized beacons, one of them being a ‘‘road’’ beacon that can only protect 1 on the y axis, so you could put it on top of a road, or you know, like on the blocks that form the road

24

I mean I know what you mean but I don’t quite see why something, apart from being temp beacons, should prevent anybody from using them.
If a guild has enough ressources to keep up a town with temp beacons. Then let them do it.
Although the costs might quickly exceed what they would have had to gather for permanent beacons. So that could be a reason to not use perma beacons for large projects.

25

Yeah, which is also why i said they should be based on area in cubemeters (the amount of blocks that it covers)

i wouldnt mind temp beacons, i really dont, as long as we have the option to atleast get 1 permanent beacon, because the entire point of beacons should be keeping your stuff safe, and i think it would be pretty cruel if we cant even get a single house without the game being like ‘‘if you dont pay, you lose all of the stuff because everybody can take it’’

1 Like
26

Yea that for sure. Both would be perfect. But at least permanent beacons.

27

Oh! :unamused:
you’re a manager type?! :persevere:
and you’re clearly the kind that thinks that we should have to perform the same kind of daily busy work slog in our play that we have to do at work? :tired_face:

I play games to GET AWAY FROM work!

and for someone who is SO OBSESSED with griefers to advocate systems that turn the mechanics of the game into the BIGGEST griefer…
one that sits in your base and extorts you “FEED ME or I’ll delete all your everything!”

that’s how I see temporary beacons that need fuel
so, no, I won’t build outside my beacon at all If that is what happens

28

If you can’t be bothered to maintain your power outside of your main beacon, then you’ve got no business having power outside your main beacon. Which is ok, that makes room for other players who do.

2 Likes
29

I have a thought for this that might please all of you - on both sides of the question! I made another post about it - because the entire plan was about PVP - but it included an idea for beacons.

Here’s the idea: Add a mini-beacon into the game. In my head it’s a lamp made of gleam - but it would need to be pretty, and functional, easy/cheap to make, and visually indestinguishable from a regular lamp if you use white gleam.

BUT - it only protects a small radius, and it expires - becomes a lamp with no owner, claimable by anyone if you are offline (possibly off-server or X distance away for the sake of abandoned or lost builds) for a week. Yes, that’s a problem if that were it.

Insert beacons. Beacons have more options. They are harder to make, and they take more player inactivity to expire - 1 monthish. Beacons power gleam lamps - make them expand to a larger protection radius, and take on all options - and expiration date - of the beacon. That way you could beacon weird shapes without crazy resources.

Then beacons can be fueled. I talk about different grades of fuel and what it would do in my post - but in the case of builders, the simplest, easiest to get fuel could be used to prepare for inactivity. If you plan to be offgame or away from your build for a few months, fully fuel your beacon before leaving. When fuel runs out, your month timer will start, but hopefully you can manage to log in by then. If you visit your beacon regularly, you won’t need fuel at all.

I can still see how it would suck to come back to the game after 1 year of inactivity to nothing… but think about this. You start building on a pretty mountain. Someone else starts building on the next mountain over. They get half finished, then abandon their build. Meanwhile, you’ve finished your build, and it looks great. Should the abandoned, half finished build continue to be protected, forever?

1 Like
30

as inconvenient as it may be for people’s neighbors, yes. it should stay protected forever. as much as evryone would like to take the guy’s place scince he’s not using it, it should be his right to keep it abandoned for as long as he owns the land, because it’s his stuff. and also who can really judge whether a creation, finished or not, should be wiped off the face of the planet? also, what if someone went on vacation and forgot to fuel the beacons?

31

Many people on minecraft’s servers choping a trees only in down and middle part, not removing top of tree and not plant saplings in place of choped tree. I reflect upon it and contrive next idea: ground block under the lowermost block of timber must be not just ground, but something like ground with rhizome (rooty sapling). This block must give dirt and sapling (may be special kind of sapling), but not a timber. And tree can grow back on the same place from this rhizome block. It’s simply way to reconstruct a forest, how I think.

32

I don’t quite see the reason behind such a block?
If you want to reforest an area you can do that anyway. And if the server should regenerate a forest it can do that anyway too.

2 Likes
33

Every talk about subject stops on a contradiction “how to automaticaly know where needs regen and how to prevent it”. If the rhizome is, tree will be regenerated; if the rhizome removed, tree will not never grow back. It’s simply, don’t you think so?

34

It’s not a contradiction, it’s just an open question.
And scrap the not from not never and I agree^^
It might be a solution. But you should be able to craft that block too.

One problem is: What about abandoned places where that block was removed? How should nature grow back there? That would need a second system and there might be other edge cases like that.
My vote still goes to an intelligent system that “knows” where to regenerate and where not.

2 Likes
35

i agree with kuma, i still go for ‘‘regen everything not beaconed’’ to keep a fresh feel to the world. its going to be interesting to see how it will work with roads and such, would be pretty cool if we could have ‘‘infrastructure’’ becons where you can literally beacon a single block or a small 3 wide, 3 tall field. however that is slightly off topic, the point was that an automated system would be best in my eyes :smiley:

1 Like
36

This is what I was talking about when I was talking about ravaged worlds.

I think the regeneration should start after a day, or maybe 2-3 days. This way it’s still possible to build a temporal shelter to spend the night in safety even without a Beacon, but the world will still return to its original state when you’re gone.

Also I think that certain resources should take longer time to regenerate, like this: dirt = sand -> clay -> stone = coal -> iron -> gleam

If they all regenerate at an even speed, it’s possible to just find a small deposit of a resource to harvest repeatedly, therefore there would be no need to explore and find large mines.

2 Likes
37

I like the idea of having the “Protectors” roam the world doing the following:

  1. regenerating and restoring the natural state of the world, and
  2. breaking down builds outside of beacons based on two factors:
    a. giving priority to builds that have not been visited in a while (the “timer” idea above)
    b. there should be some blocks the “Protectors” cannot break (metal structures, etc.)
1 Like
38

This is actually cool. But that would require the Protectors to be able to go literally ANYWHERE. What if the ocean floor gets damaged? That means the Protector should go there and fix it. This would require at least several Protectors per world, and they should regenerate/revive upon being killed too.

This also puts us as the bad guys, lol.

2 Likes
39

3 days ingame? thats one hour, personally think that is way too slowly, i 2 days real time would be great though.

also for this

they already said somewhere that if you forexample mine a vein of iron, when it respawns it will be normal stone and a vein of iron will spawn somewhere else, so the materials are constantly changing :slight_smile:

1 Like
40

No, I meant 1-3 days IRL.

That’s great!

1 Like