How would you feel about a setting for Settlements that determines buffers?

[majorvex]

James was trying really hard to help me with the mall. It seems no solution will work for the moment, but he may have some ideas.

For the new buffers to work and not indirectly grief anyone, they need to be all on or all off. Currently, there is no way to get players that aren’t around to lower their buffers, join a guild, ask questions, etc. Also, you can’t blame anyone for turning them on to protect their stuff.

What if there was a setting under settlements that had:
all buffers off
all buffers on

I think this would greatly help markets and dense cities, which are at a halt right now.

Solo players could turn the buffers on.
Cities and markets could turn them off.

Please keep it civil. Really needing input. All ideas welcome. Thank you.

• Yes -Settlement buffer toggle
• No - Settlement buffer toggle
• Other - I want something else
• Pizza

[NerArth]

If you could elaborate, would this be an option for every minor settlement or just major settlements, or how were you thinking it would work?

[Kelmat]

The default to off setting isn’t an option?
i.e. If you’re in a settlement already, for the initial load the default is off. Then new beacons would default to on?

[Kirinvar]

I really liked the idea at first.
But what about smaller settlements with buffers on being absorbed by bigger ones with buffers off (or vise versa)?
Will the setting be forced on the smaller settlement that got absorbed? (probably yes? - that would lead to new drama)

Edit:

Looking closer at the idea:

• If it’s only the greater settlement level it will cause grief for smaller annexed settlements. (If someone else can turn your buffer off, it kinda defeats the idea of the whole buffer system)
• If it’s also on the guild settlement level anyone can just align their beacon to a different guild, change their setting and ruin the city for everyone else. (and that kinda defeats the idea of the whole settlement level toggle)

I changed my vote to no.

But I agree something has to be done to make living in a big city bearable again.

[majorvex]

Default is on. So everyone that has Gleamclub and went M.I.A. has buffers on.
Your neighbors may decide to turn their buffers on.

[Xaldafax]

Before I vote I would need to know which settlement you are talking about.

I assume you mean the larger settlement that is being joined or is this just the settlement option under the single beacon?

If it is the larger then I am completely against it UNTIL we have the option to choose which settlement we can join. At this point my guild settlement is part of a larger city that annexed us. If they turn off the buffer for the larger settlement I am stuck having to deal with their decision.

If you meant the other one then maybe I am ok with it… I need more info though.

[Kelmat]

Well, yeah today but couldn’t that be reversed tomorrow? Or is that a noob question, LOL?

[majorvex]

It wasn’t my idea, but I like it and I think it could work.

I’m not sure what would happen if a larger settlement gobbled up a smaller one. It doesn’t take much to become a settlement right now.

[majorvex]

It’s sticky because how do you know which neighbor has the oldest plots/beacons before you unplot or lower your buffer? If you don’t know and you have the newest space, you lose.

[Evergreen]

I know this is just another band-aid for the previous band-aid so that’s why I’m going to vote for other. I think the entire plot system itself needs a rework and that’s where I wish they would focus their energies.

[Kelmat]

Ohhh, yeah now I see the real problem. What a can of worms this has opened!

[majorvex]

Without re-doing the whole game, there’s no way to implement an entire new plot/real estate system because plots are tied to cubits and $$$.

If there is a logical enough situation that we can work with and adapt, I will.

[Nightstar]

I voted for pizza because honestly IDK WTF any more.

Whatever I deleted a bunch of stuff that’s only partially relevant, too.

Also remember that if you turn off all of your settlement buffers someone can take you over and turn them back on.

EDIT sorry kelmat even though i know how to change reply status i accidentally replied to you instead of the thread.

[Evergreen]

If that’s what you got out of the conversation talking to James on how to fix the system, then that sucks. Adapting is the only choice we have so of course that’s what folks who enjoy the game will have to do. Just cements my reasons for building out in the wild away from big builds. Good luck to you guys, I hope something becomes possible.

edit: i thought the goal going forward was to make things less complicated. I don’t know how this system part of the game gets fixed without it being more complicated. I still think this is a way to deal with this entire exact problem and have it be abused/be an issue on a lower scale. I don’t know if it is remotely possible at all though.

This is playing out just like I envisioned it may in the worst case scenario just before it was released.

Settlement Revamp - Opt-in Versus Forced

This whole thing reads as putting a band aid on a broken system. Sometimes the entire system is just the problem and there’s no way to fix it, no matter what kind of band-aid it gets. The game already is overly complex. This is just going to add another layer of complexity. If anything happens at this point it seems like a new system over-all would be a better fix so band-aids aren’t going to be constantly happening. This isn’t the first or second time plots and beacons have been messed with. W…

Settlement Revamp - Opt-in Versus Forced

I’m not trying be derisive or anything of that nature. This is just how I see this problem. It’s why I just dont try to build near anyone else. This system is going to constantly have band-aids applied. We’ve already seen this in the past, more will just prove the pattern as time goes on because that’s human nature, admittedly or not. I’ve got a few ideas that I think would work but I don’t bother to post it because I know a chunk of the player base would be wildly upset, and understandably so …

@Evergreen

That said : Honestly I think a unique and revenue generating way to address this is have a store/cubit plot designed so that a player can drop down a massive plot(s) that allows others to place their plots in side it for a fee, which is paid to the main plot owner (mall owner if you will for example, just like a lease) and maybe a portion of it to taxes if the devs ever felt like the game needed a sink)). This would help a lot of problems in city builds and mall builds. This would give the owner total control of who can build in the area as there would need to be a permission to be accepted in to building. It’s also a ghetto way of dealing with private worlds until those are actually released (if ever). If people can not do certain things with their beacons. This would also help, I think at least, centralize shops as people would flock to a shop system that has stability in shops coming/going/activity/etc, But at the same time this idea might be completely against the Boundless a lot of people play. I feel like it helps fix a beacon issue as far as stores/cities/malls are concerned and a central shopping concern many have by not knowing where to find things for sale. Perhaps the big plots could have a compass marker so you see when you visit a planet.

I know, pretty out there stuff, but I just don’t see a way that the current system ‘stays’ fixed.

[Kirinvar]

Looking closer at the idea:

• If it’s only the greater settlement level it will cause grief for smaller annexed settlements. (If someone else can turn your buffer off, it kinda defeats the idea of the whole buffer system)
• If it’s also on the guild settlement level anyone can just align their beacon to a different guild, change their setting and ruin the city for everyone else. (and that kinda defeats the idea of the whole settlement level toggle)

I changed my vote to no.

But I agree something has to be done to make living in a big city bearable again.

Also: Pizza is winning.

[scrufola]

@majorvex

What if there was a setting under settlements that had:
all buffers off
all buffers on

• Who can toggle that setting?
• Probably the major? What’s going to prevent me from prestiging up my shop at the mall and toggle it on. Just because I can?
• What’s going to prevent my build from being toggled off? Let’s assume I connect my settlement with player A (we both agree, we both have reservation active). Then, player A misjudges player B, connects with B, B prestiges up, gets major, turns it off, then surrounds me?

While I agree that this would solve your problem… it’s another layer of indirection to make plotting even more complicated.

[majorvex]

@Xaldafax

we have the option to choose which settlement we can join

I know this goes against real-world city/state/country dynamics, but I totally agree with you. And this is a virtual game…not real life. We shouldn’t be forced to join any settlement.

I think this would be a negative for malls/market “towns” though because we really need everyone to have all buffers on or all buffers off. A lot of the shops have to build up their prestige to get footfall. A lot of them end up becoming their own settlements. Lots of them.

I would really like to save the mall if possible.

Any ideas are welcome. Besides starting over completely. I’d really not like to have to do that.

[majorvex]

@Nightstar

Also remember that if you turn off all of your settlement buffers someone can take you over and turn them back on.

Yup. I was getting ready to do just that so people could set up a new shop and James stopped me. Whew

[Xaldafax]

So was this feature for the greater settlement? See @Kirinvar’s post. It better communicates what I was concerned with!

[majorvex]

I don’t have any answers, just questions.