Settlement Revamp - Opt-in Versus Forced


#21

Lol… you fight with everybody on virtually everything! Yeah even seen you in action on the No Mans Sky! :wink:

So let us use an in game example…Duskmoor on Phenorium…

They are expanding at an amazing rate… there were other settlements in the area…wasnt Blacklight one of them? Over time Duskmoor prospered and grew like the Roman Empire… whether your were absorbed outright or not really did not matter… in the long run whether you were an “independent” community or not, You were in Duskmoor. You were independent perhaps but you were not going to grow either… your time in free open country was long past. The new buffer will simply give you TWO plots (16 blocks) of space between Xaldafax Village and Duskmoor’s 2nd and 3rd avenues which you are now living in between.

You may now have the last word… however reality is what it is mate.


#22

This works in “new” scenarios and not in existing scenarios. I pushed the 2 plot buffer zone idea as well and see how it can help in certain scenarios. It doesn’t help at all in existing ones.

A good example of this is Axon on Biitula where we have people near the PS New Hub asking to have plots removed so they can separate from Axon. This city is hundreds of blocks away and should not in any way be part of their City. So clearly the city design in this game is not working well and creating cities that don’t make sense.

All I am asking for is options which ultimately hurts no ones. People that want to create cities can easily create them. Those that don’t want to get to.


#23

You REALLY wanted to elicit another response from me lol… Ok…

You may want to Look Again… the player who connected BOTH of us against our will (Dr. ###M) 's property finally burned… we are as far as I am aware disconnected. If he purposely connects us again Please report him personally to the Devs…

Which brings me to the next point… you were part of our city and benefited from “great city” footfall… if an area retains its identity as a District of, or Borough of … and you benefit from it coin wise… and even though the larger city gets the benefit of the smaller enity’s prestige being added to the city total, the smaller entity benefits from the entire city’s presitge total. Seems like quite the deal for the smaller entity.

This buffer is going to be problematic for a lot of people in the game… for me however it will be a wonderful addition as it will allow me to run roads to within a couple plots of settlements WITH ZERO Danger of Annexing them. I build my roads as a Public Works project for the planet as a whole… I like building things people will actually USE and BENEFIT from…and I know I use them too…

So in conclusion we will have to wait and see…


#24

It definitely doesn’t work like that in my city either.

I live on the outskirts of a city itself, but I still don’t have the area code that anything related to the city has, nor do I ever say I live in that city. I say I live in that suburb, and it’s under stood right away.

I guess it’s kinda like when people say they’re from Queens or Bronx. Despite it being a part of New York City (I think), people still say they’re from the suburb, rather than the bigger city.

Honestly, I’d love if you’d be able to send a ping to ‘bordering’ Beacons, and leave a notice to them like “Hey you want to join up?” and have it tell them on the beacon itself when you next log in, as well as a little boop on the chat as a ‘notification’ on logging in.

With a two-plot buffer zone, you could say it’d cost each person two plots to merge, or have the game say “Okay, you want to join. Buffer is eliminated temporarily; you now have X time to connect the two by plots before the agreement expires.”

Let’s say X is 72 hours, so it gives people three days to link up, or the buffer is no longer ignored between the two.


#25

what if beacons just stay neutral until they allign themself to another beacon off choice
if ya have 20 alligned beacons (touching eachother) its a province if ya then allign 5provinces you get a town
guild allignement is seperate from this and spans the universe
i also think they really need to neigbor eachother and agree to allign to make a town
if people dont wonna allign in between alligned beacons ya cant build a town
and you become a ghetto :+1:and maybe its time to move to a nicely organized town with provinces

ow if a place is allready a province our a town you forced to join it cause you came to late to the party !!!


#26

I like the idea of having it be an opt in/opt out option because of the same reasoning.

It would, imo, offer up diplomacy as an option for settlement leaders to choose to merge their settlements to be part of a bigger city.

being forced into someones city because of plot abuse sucks, and it is not all that crazy of an idea to have 2 cities being right next to each other. you see that IRL


#27

You have your view because you have vested interest to get the game how you want it.


#28

No. He’s literally echoing an extremely common complaint about settlements since the game launched. This has nothing to do with his preferences.

He is trying to help the game appeal to more players.


#29

I was happy to join a city when I moved, but the main person pushing it left soon after.

Various things have happened in the alst 6 months but now it’s just a bunch of (mostly) abandoned builds tying a couple of larger ones together for city status (and footfall).

I don’t rely on footfall. I think I would happily opt out of the larger city to be the warden of my own build at this point. When a major build decayed, I was separate for a couple days. Then someone came on, linked me back to the city with a road, and vanished again.

sigh


#30

Incorrect in one way that there were three blank plots you added to the side off your road that connected to his road. You could have easily removed them as we asked about it. They were just empty plots and not an existing road. He did the road but those 3 plots are there off your road as well. They could be pulled.

Ultimately, this post is not about those 3 plots. It is about what that scenario is causing between us and others. The scenario I am trying to stop. Forced connections and names being taken from people. Additionally, prestige that is owned by one person being added to another city without our control. This lack of control is the problem. You, me, everyone worked to gain their prestige. Someone should not be able to come in and place down 3 plots and force the connection.

Even with the buffer zones this will not solve the problem. In the situation where 1 person allows the connection to be made the prestige and name is taken over. People cannot control what other people do but we should be able to control what we do and who we want to connect with. Buffers will not fix this. I link to someone but they then link to you and bam I am part of your city without my approval. So how can I undo it? Easy use the option I am talking about of selecting the settlement I wish to join.

You are attributing a “benefit” to something that was not requested or even solicited. It was decided by whoever made the decision themselves to create the link. That isn’t right at any level. If people wanted to be part of the great city, the feature I am suggesting gives them that choice. Choice is the key word.

If you have no issues with running roads that stop annexation you should have no issues with allowing people to chose what settlement they are in for those that are already touching.

The game I want is the same one almost every person wants - options to chose and not be forced into problems with other people or be able to keep the hard work we did for ourselves.

Additionally, the difference is I didn’t force the annexation. I get and can support the idea that you like to build roads. Hence why I put the suggestion up to mark beacons as “roads” and this suggestion to allow people to chose their settlement. You are right now fighting a valid solution that gives you what you say you want “roads” and gives other people the same thing - to pick the city they put their prestige toward


#31

He could be echoing the voice of the world and that wouldn’t make what I said less true. I never said he was wrong or right or if I agreed or disagreed. What I wanted to point out is the argument he used with Krasniy could be used with him also. I do believe he wants the improve the game but please don’t try to make me believe their isn’t self interest involved as well. Almost every single argument over suggestions in the forums involves some sort of self interest. This applies to everyone including myself of course.

Just because I disagree with someone and might think some ideas aren’t going to be good for game doesn’t mean I think they personally don’t want the best for community. Telling someone their idea or their position is strictly based on their self interest is a flawed and weak argument.


#32

Once again comrade you do not know the facts the three plots that you are mentioning or actually to connect to another player at their request. It had nothing to do with the connection. Each time we disconnected he reconnected… After the players property decayed he reconnected it there. By that point it was clear that no matter what I did he would reconnect so I said screw it.

I do find one thing interesting though you never seem to be very happy with anything. Always complaining or suggesting some new way of doing things and of course if anyone disagrees with you you muchos hablar them into the ground. Maybe you should try to find more happiness or good in the game and probably even in the world.


#33

@krasniy it’s like you were just in my head… :vulcan_salute::nerd_face:


#34

It may work that way in New York but as someone who lives in Chicago I can tell you Joliet will always be Joliet. No one calls that Chicago and if an out of towner did we would correct them. Now if you want to say something that’s not a city like Lincoln Square and call that Chicago by all means go ahead. Lincoln Square is a neighborhood not a town not a city.


#35

Joliet is nearly an hour from Chicago lol… say Hi to Lockport for me! And the state prison is in Joliet… Chicago is home to my Cubbies

Not anywhere near the same thing as Culver City and Los Angeles


#36

The prison in Joliet has been closed for some time now. And Chicago is home to my White Sox :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:. I’m a south sider


#37

White Sox Fan? Oh I am so sorry. lol


#38

Thanks but you don’t need to defend me Miner. I’m used to people shooting down ideas with with misdirection, etc instead of focusing on whether things do or don’t make sense.

Let’s get back to the thread, though, please. Did you have any other ideas not already presented on the method to revamp settlements into an Opt-In model instead of forced?


#39

Question here, if a city links you and you become part of it, but overtime you get more prestige then that city, would it fall under your city name? I hope you get a point.


#40

I believe it might? I know the city itself probably would, but the ‘guild’ part of a city shouldn’t fall under anyone new.

I’d assume.