It’s the expectation that you are a part of the guild, and you like it, so you decide to donate. Players don’t continually donate to random guilds they aren’t a part of (not as much as their own or primary guild). Therefore you are losing something, if you decide to troll and are kicked.
You join the guild, you like it>align beacon to guild after joining>give permissions>donate/invest in guild>troll/grief>get kicked
Now since you gave the guild your beacon’s permissions, they can quickly take it over, if they wanted to.
And influenced by the community, Which is why I am persistent in starting this kind of conversation.
Then plots placed on that world should be taken out of the world owners plots, not the players. The player owns the plots and therefore when a player places a plot with his own ACL on it, there is an expectation that the stuff inside of that plot is his.
I’m not sure that would change. We are all speculating since we have very little information. I would assume anything belonging to a player and within their beacon (unless they give/share control as they can now), would still be their’s.
Even if someone is banned from a planet, I think they should be given time to move/collect their items or they should go back into their inventory.
I think the options @Stretchious gives make complete sense. Banning a player should be instant with full removal of all items they own in the world and they should be returned to the player via the Gift System that the devs have talked about.
People that pay for a planet should have control over it. If people are doing something that is a direct griefing of people via their banning then that should be handled by another process as well.
They make sense yes, but it doses little if anything to resolve the threat, in the event someone built on the world not expecting this to happen or be abused against them. I would also think coding this type of system would be an nightmare for the devs with out having to rework how blocks and things are saved in the world files.
We have very little Information indeed, it is 100% possible that I am debating a mute point and the devs have no intention of giving people that level of access control. or they have some very nice way to handle abuse situations already planned out. But I am still going to speak my mind about it until we get more infomation
All points of view are helpful to the devs, I’d imagine . I don’t agree with you on some things, but I do read your replies and I can understand where you are coming from.
I don’t know the full back end but they have a clear accounting of each block we have. So it is just a matter of adding all that and putting it into a storage spot in the sanctum while they force a regen on the planet like a regen bomb.
Every system we have is abused in some way but I think we just need clear guidelines communicated to people when rented planets come out. That way at least the information is available.
Well the thing that makes me think it might be a nightmare, is how defined is their accounting system and how hard is it for them to rework it should it fall short? I don’t know if considerations have already been made, maybe they have. But the problem I feel would be, being able to correctly and accurately define the player placed blocks from the Non-player placed blocks and that from the Altered non-player placed blocks. As some builds use existing natural blocks that may or may not have been altered.
If the system fails to do this accurately then you will get one of 2 situations. The player loses stuff. Or the system can be abused for strip mining. depending on which way it fails or falls short.
Their accounting is pretty precise. They know how many items are in storage, mined, etc. Now if it is correlated directly to a person or just a general world entry I am not sure of. I wouldn’t doubt it is linked to the player.
They can even track how the planets have changed as we clear out land. Allowing them to play back what happened. I haven’t asked directly about this feature but heard about it from someone who should know their functionality.
Now you bring up natural blocks versus placed blocks. I think then the conversation needs to be related to if the banning of a player means they get back the stuff they put into the world or if they get back the full build they did. Those are two things to consider and each has it merits.
When talking to them recently about a blueprint system I found out they can already copy and paste in the game in basic ways. We talked about various options on how blueprints could work and what made sense to do quickly versus on a more advanced system and how copy between planets might work.
So we could take your second point about the “build being lost” and look at them taking an exact blueprint of your build and allowing you to place it somewhere else.
Overall I think we need to focus on how to protect people from abuse on all sides of the situation in regards to planets and one a different topic about how we handle those situations.
I remember there being a patch in EA that caused a bunch of people to lose items. The Dev’s were able to use a “mailing” feature to send them what they lost. So the back end may already be there if it is something they still have.
Every good idea needs chewed apart like a college thesis. Helps the devs discover potential issues before they happen. The sooner we get private worlds, the sooner Boundless can truly launch. It’s a good game right now, but it’s only hovering a few inches off the ground. The game’s distance between full potential vs where we are now is huge.
Private servers (connected to the main universe) are good because:
Repeatable monthly revenue in addition to Gleam Club.
Growth. The game would appeal to a larger player base with private worlds.
Advertisement. More streamers would play the game, and online communities would become more cohesive. “Our planet is awesome!” just has a nicer ring than “Our town is awesome!” Word of mouth at this game’s scale is a very powerful tool. Who knows, maybe Nike will own a planet one day…
Even inferior games have private servers… if Conan Exiles can do it, anybody can.
Almost all current player beefs can be solved with private worlds. No griefing, encircling, dead beacons, mass land grabs, gleam towers in the middle of your 1870s London inspired town…
Recruitment. People with their own servers may take pride in them. They will most likely want others to come play with them. Some will even bring new players to the game in an attempt to bump their server population up.
It doesn’t hurt the game. People will still have need for regular servers, the portal hubs, etc. unless they rent three tier 6 worlds with all the gems.
What are all the negatives private worlds will most likely bring…?
If people beyond the owner and whitelisted people (“friends”) can do stuff on the planet then you will still have various issues with these things.
Where it does hurt is you will have even more spread out player base. Right now we have lots of dead areas… that will exist in some form or fashion as well.
I am not against private servers but just don’t think they should be a priority even though I recently talked with James about how we could enable local server planet installs for people to play without needing anything but their computer.
Oh man I would love to be able to just download European planets so I can still farm and stuff when the internet is foaming at the mouth.
Boundless is a little like No Man’s Sky in being spread out though. Currently you are looking at 4-8 players on a typical planet, and if they aren’t in a town, partied up or hunting together chances are they’re unaware of each other. Private worlds would spread the population a little thinner, but people already don’t see each other as it is, and some worlds would become “Go-To” planets, the hip-happening place to be. As it currently is, the closest thing we have to a Go-To planet is Finata because of Ultima. Portal Seekers is a nice network, but as far as I know they don’t have an equivalent to Aquatopia - the network IS their build.
There is the P2W situations that I debated about ages ago. But that is of a lesser concern for me.
I think some people might object to their work being handed out to other people to do as they wish with it.
However this is most likely possible to be done without authorization. In minecraft I found a tool that would download and save world data as it was loaded into the client. creating a copy of every block that was loaded into the memory of the client, I am sure someone can create a tool to do this for boundless as well. There is just one major part missing at this time. Because there is no offline function built into the game at this time, We can’t do anything with the world file even if we had it and because we have no offline function we don’t have a base world file to start out with to try to understand how to save the data from the client into the file.
And this is more the private server model where the player can mod the planet so it does not connect to the public universe. I am not sure how well this fits into growing the player base or the game. If I have my own planet(s) on my own computer, then there is no chance for interaction with the public universe. So the number of players in the public universe declines and at some point do we have an MMO Sandbox or a single player Sandbox? I do not need to pay for gleam club or buy cubits because I can mod the game so I have unlimited plots and my beacons never expire. I see this as actually hurting the games income which means no income to fund development or the servers that host the public universe.
I like the idea of being able to cut down on the grind by modding the game, but unless there is a way for the developers to still generate some income, as they might from hosting servers, I am not sure this is good for the game long term.
The conversation was not about modding or things like that. It was about the feasibility of having what we have currently in the public universe on a persons local system with no adjustment. They have a multi-component system to support our universe so it wouldn’t be an easy setup. The conversation then shifted to just the ability to create a single world type model and how feasible that might be.
Ultimately we discussed whether it would cost or be free and how it might or might not affect the game and whether it makes sense considering their current development cycles of focusing on larger player affecting systems.
No decisions were made except likely them just having a conversation around it because they frequently talk about various things they see/hear from players via community interaction.
Personally I can see how it could affect the player base but not any worse than private or public worlds where people can start being segmented off even more than we currently are with 48+ planets. Not to mention that Minecraft has done more than fine with people being able to run a local server. Many games offer options like this and they continue development. I think that likely more than a few people that played and left might have stayed around if they could have played locally…
I like it because I’m a builder and this offers one of the easier avenues to build and generate my own look and feel on where I live. I don’t need the economy or portal networks or other components of the game since they have inherent issues and cause player responses that aren’t always helpful or fun to be around. Anyway I asked and discussed it because I wanted to just know if it was an easy win or something much more program intensive. It is the later and I certainly wouldn’t advocate for its development right away over other things we need more to stabilize the game. But, it should be discussed and looked at on whether to add it or not to the roadmap at least. I hope me asking did that.
Yes. In Trove, the player owned/created planets/clubs have regions on them just like BL public planets. You have permissions that you can grant and remove from the regions, the players, the entire place, etc. Works great. I allow everyone to come in and use the machines & fixtures. I don’t allow people to destroy/take blocks or machines. If people want to build then I give them permissions on a region of land and let them do whatever they want.
disagree…if you rent the world you get the choice. Its their money and the money stream to the Developers is important.
If you do not approve of these things then make the choice to ignore those planets all together but if the planet conforms with the rules of the universe it WILL be part of it according to the Devs
. I don’t agree with you on some things, but I do read your replies and I can understand where you are coming from. 