indeed, some looters might use such mechanics to loot longer and more, but I have seen a lot of players who really “save” places and contact the owners, being ready to hand it over if they simply forgot to fuel their beacon etc.
however, even if someone loots such unbeaconed place, it’s no one’s loss (the owner of the beacon is losing it anyway if he is not around to fuel the beacon again); it’s sure not my loss if someone out there gets a lot of goods from unprotected beacon - it’s the looter’s gain and it’s within game mechanics
at the same time, this suggested mechanics create more space for genuine thoughtful people who can save a nice build next door, that they like to have there as part of their town, or that can plot such place having in mind handing it back over to the owner (should he/she come back to play)
regeneration and losing property through regeneration or players’ action is part of this game already and tweaking it a bit doesn’t seem to do any damage here (so I think anyway)
looting is not really a bad thing, evil thing, morally unsound or whatever way you want to put it; when it happens, what would have been otherwise lost becomes someone else’s property
I would like to see updates how build stuff decays by having few states how plots are released back to wilderness when it is caused by running out of fuel.
And one of these things would be having this regen bomb protection but possibility to loot beacon which is feature that has been lost from game after updated aggressive world regeneration and bombs.
If the owner is done with it and doesn’t want anyone to have it, they can take the 5 minutes to delete the beacon and regen it themselves.
Not one single person has argued against the owner having the right to destroy their own build.
I think even unplotting should allow regen bombs to work as well. For example, if someone wants to level a section of their build, they should be able to unplot that section rather than needing to delete the entire beacon and deploy the area they want to keep.
And even if the current system doesn’t know the difference between an expired and a deleted beacon, I’m sure it would be far easier to implement than the protection zones we have now to prevent a different type of griefing.
And yes, regen bombing a build as others are working to save it is 100% griefing. I’ve gotta wonder the real intentions of those hollowly arguing against this idea.
this could work. after a plot is removed, a ‘ghost plot’ remains in its place. anyone can replot it, anyone can manually derstroy blocks in it, but regen bombs won’t work in it. ghost plots could decay the same way blocks do, you could have an option so turn them on/ off in beacon settings in case you want to quickly regen a part of your thing
IMO there are enough empty abandoned builds in boundless we really don’t need more . Let someone else come along and build something new . cycle of life .
I strongly disagree with regening a recently expired build being called trolling or griefing. Just because someone may want to save a build or take resources from a build does not make it trolling if someone else wants to erase a build. They could want it gone because they want to build on that spot or it may be close to their build and they do not want to look at it or just may want to see what happens when they regen bomb it. If its not their build then why does a player have any more right to do anything with it than any other player?
I posted this right before bed last night, and slightly sleep deprived, but I wasn’t thinking of trying to make this a grievable thing.
The Ghost plots are very much like what I was thinking. So nothing around them can also not be done. If the user chooses to delete their own beacon – that is up to them. They give up the protection. Or maybe have a switch turned on as an option “Do you want to have beacon fade insurance?” where the user can choose to have protection if the beacon fades by accident.
Give the users a choice since some seem they would be willing to destroy their own builds? This would give people the option – it’s no different than being on an Exo planet and having a meteor land in the middle of a good farming spot for a material.
As far as time-- I was certainly not thinking lonnggg term. But Max 12-hours, Minimum 4 hours. This will allow for people to see it pending timezone it gives people a chance to catch it or not.
Now, Kal-El brings up a good point-- New versus Old and “Spot placement”. This is a very good argument against it. I myself have waited out a beacon from someone who joined, played and either left or forgot their beacon has a limited timer. I think maybe having the option or not for the protection to be applied as an option under beacon settings. Only the owner of the beacon can turn it on or off. And if the window is small enough that it shouldn’t be a big issue.
As for Krisys’s comment about enough abandonded builds, There are a lot. You aren’t wrong. But-- Some people do try to save them because A. they could be relocating them elsewhere to a place that might be more active. B. Could have memories of it, or the time they spent with that person, or holding onto it for a friend who might come back? or C. Building is a large part of this game. If we throw everything away as soon as we are ready to build another object/build… It can make it difficult to find things we want to find. Examples: The Angel there in Ultima-- I use that as a Landmark anytime I am in the city. It tells me I am close to the portals.
I hope this helps where I was coming from idea wise. This is not and was not meant to be something to cause players more grief, or annoyance. But-- I think it would be a neat thing to have AS an option. And only applied to
May be a bit late, or even somewhat redundant to some posts here, but I feel the beacon fuel times are very generous time periods that can be extended, or if you are even playing once a month, can keep track of popping in for two minutes to refuel. On top of that there are the gleam club members which have no worries at all as long as they actively are members. I feel it’s kind of sad to see massive or creative/beautiful builds get removed or Regen bombed if some folks are out there doing such things… However, I agree with those who say it is what it is essentially.
If a player decides they have had enough and bail, and also do not give the build over to members or friends if any, then if it goes, unfortunately it goes.
Picture this on a much larger scale with thousands of potential players down the road. If servers get that full with people one day, builds of all kinds will be absolutely everywhere. How will that play out with player turnover in a cluttered server?? Would be a cluster.
I feel as sad as it can be to see such builds disappear, the beacon fuel times are quite lengthy to preserve what’s there. If it goes beyond that given time (plus the warnings it boldly gives players and guild member about other beacons expiring) then it truly is open to whatever happens. I just feel the current protection and times we have are really good to prevent this issue if the player is even barely active. If someone wants to take someone’s build if they feel they quit, I think it should be a race or challenge of sorts to keep it active, as it was built by someone else anyway.
Sorry for the lengthy post. It’s just difficult to keep certain topics short and sweet sometimes
This being an MMO as well, not everyone will play similarly, or have the same current respect towards others as many of us do in this current game state.
I agree this should be an option that is on by default, but the owner can disable it when deleting beacons so they can instantly regen if desired. The main time this protection should trigger is natural expiration or short term replotting. Duration can be somewhere between half to full time needed for a beacon to fully regen naturally.
I think the ghost plots idea is the best version - definitely do not want this to be able to block regening nearby by making and deleting beacons repeatedly.
There are other scenarios this would guard against too. Regenning next to a beacon that isn’t visibly decayed could be a costly and unintended mistake, as is someone nearby regenning in the middle of a plot swap. Especially near resources or others using regen bombs to flatten terrain, these cases are very possible.
Have you ever seen the battles between those saving a build, taking the resources, and/or regen bombing?
I can tell you this much, out of the three groups, someone saving a build is very unlikely to be insulting to those trying to destroy it at the same time. The reverse is absolutely not true though…
What xaviien says has been witnessed very recently, hense the creation of this topic and it happened to be on build/home of one of my friends on the planet I live on lasaina and I still thank the Glitch guild for saving it from a person trying to regen bomb it. It was a very lovely build and it’s on the road to being repaired
How players treat each other, being insulting in your example, has nothing to do with the mechanic nor does it create a rationale for changing the use of regen bombs in my opinion. Unkind players are likely going to be unkind in all their interactions. If the problem others are having is that a player that accidentally misses refueling their beacon looses their stuff, then a more universal way of addressing this needs to happen. Hoping that other players will maybe replot an expiring beacon seems a very haphazard way of addressing the issue.
for saving it from a person trying to regen bomb it. It was a very lovely build and it’s on the road to being repaired