I think you and I are simply on different pages, and probably not even reading the same book. I mean, how is Gleam Club a level playing field? You could have hundreds of beacons all over the universe and not have to worry about fuel for a year and a half without fail, when a player who doesn’t needs to trek round and keep them all fuelled and be sure not to miss any.
For the record, I’m fine with the costs and benefits of Gleam club as it is, but I’m not the one in favour of a level playing field detached from money…
While you may not be ‘theoretically’ against control, everything you have said you think should not be available to people paying for a private server leaves them with next to no control at all.
A persons ‘best efforts’ to protect their assets would be to not build on a private world owned by someone they don’t trust. Even better, if private server owner had the ability to whitelist/blacklist people from being able to build or mine, those same poor defenceless players wouldn’t even have assets on the private server to lose in the first place.
Gleam club is insurance that your stuff will not vanish if you get called away on jury duty, get into a car crash and are in the hospital, or some other situation happens where you can not play the game.
I think one of the top causes of players leaving the game prematurely is expired beacons. I honestly think that all beacon fuel should last 2 to 3 times longer then it doses now.
This is a function that helps keep players playing who would otherwise be forced to quit because they would have to start over from gar nichts, I think this is an acceptable imbalance, and it doesn’t really translate into turning cash into coin in my book.
I don’t have a problem with the server owner being allowed to block players from building. Just from mining if doing so means exclusive access to rare colors that can flipped non stop for endless coin,
Yes… that is becoming quite apparent and explains a lot.
However you want to phrase it and however you describe Gleam club, it is people paying real money for something beneficial that those who choose not to or who can not pay, do not have. Perhaps those people who don’t have gleam club would like that insurance too?
So, paying money (a real-life resource that some people have more access to than others) should not be able to in any way translate into in-game coins in order to maintain a level playing field. Is that your new stance?
I wasn’t ignoring your question. Apologies for the lack of response. I have been thinking of a good reply. Unfortunately I still don’t have one. I favor having rental planets. I’m unsure if I would have one myself mostly because I have a sentimental attachment to my settlement in which recently became a city after a year of gameplay. But I believe that rental planets would be a great option along with as many player customizations available as possible. Lighting customization in my opinion would make some players happy.
Given that ‘upside’ it a very relative and wholly opinion-based term, I can see how you might be able to use it to validate your stance that advantage through paying for Gleam Club is acceptable, but not through paying for a Private planet.
From someone else’s opinion-based viewpoint, an ‘upside’ could equally be defined as ‘A person with little time being able to make use of the fact that they have more money than time to be able to enjoy the game more’.
And with that, I think this conversation with you is concluded. It has become clear we aren’t going to find common ground on this, and because we don’t need to, it’s just a needless waste of both of our time.
I see very little way to convert gleam club in to coin. one can try to argue the case about footfall farms but that can be done just the same with out gleam club, and gleam club isn’t really an enabler of that type of behavior.
on the other hand.
If a private world has rare colors of blocks found no where else and that private world allows the prevention of anyone else other then the owner from mining on it then it can be used as a P2W situation as that person is paying for the right to be able to mass resell those rare colored blocks while preventing other people who do not pay for the same right from doing so, therefore I see it as P2W.
We don’t really need to do much of anything but yet here we are.
It’s not that you don’t explain it well enough. I absolutely understood the point you were trying to make. It’s just that we disagree, and I don’t think any amount of explanation of our own viewpoints will shift that of the other at this point.
I’d say it would be people’s responsibility as buyers to simply not buy from someone trying to sell the colors of their planet at a ridiculous price. Or if someone has color monopoly, someone else could just rent a planet with those exact same colors.
I would agree with you. No one is forced to buy anything from anyone in game. If someone wants a color that much there are options with the spraying. It might take time and be more effort than some players want to engage in, but it is possible. Might be one reason the developers added it to the game. I also agree that if someone has a rented planet with a color everyone wants, all that does in encourage someone else to do the same or the developers can spawn an exo with it.
Also I guess since the game specifically mentions players " claim a source of loot or rare resource" and players are already using real world money to do this by buying plots and surrounding areas where resources spawn, I do not see enough of a difference anyway.
Based off of the prices of gleambow gleam, I would hazard a guess that people are not going to be responsible and would be willing to pay a high price for the color,. and that was something that they themselves could go out and have a chance of getting themselves, now we are talking about something that they can not get themselves at all.
A smart person doing this, would not sell the blocks at a ridiculous price, they would sell it at a high price, but still something attractive enough for most people who want that color to buy it. or maybe just slightly higher then that.
That is correct, however someone would need to rent a world with the same color(s), and they would need to be willing to allow anyone to mine on it, otherwise it is just yet another P2W situation.
I am not sure if people are willing to pay money to rent a world with the main intent to try to break an monopoly and create a public farm, when there are too many colors this would need to be done with. I can see it happening with a select few colors maybe. But there are many colors in the game. and many different tastes and wants.
You can’t tint gleam.
I would agree with this, but the problem is, Other then black glass, I did not notice much that could be contained and locked down like this. I have seen players try to contain and lock down gems, but there are so many, that the effect of it is just slightly annoying and all you have to do is look else where.
If you were able to point me at a resource that was successfully locked down and controlled, then I would concede to this statement, but so far there has been nothing that I could not go out and get myself. the single rare resource that i feel could have had this done to it is black glass, but someone created a public farm for it.
