My bad, I thought Creative World was still “Sovereign”.
So I’m only talking about a Creative World.
I’m not interested in a rental world that plays like a world from the survival universe if I can’t decide on its landscape. The color swapping is not worth it.
If that’s final, that would suck.
It wouldn’t feel right to build a new Raxxian Sanctuary if my CW isn’t orbiting Raxxa.
Would have to be an entirely new name… might even have to reclaim the current Raxxian Sanctuary and start from scratch, which in of itself might be a mistake because we might lose interest in starting over… uuuuuuuuuugh the dilema!
There is a limit of “display in the sky.” I’m not sure what it is set at but you can have more there than being shown. I am not sure how they will solve it so people can see all of them.
On a side note:
I’ve already checked the distances, say I want a T2 EU Sovereign, I would love it if it could be as close to Trung as possible. Since it’s random but still will be orbiting near an existing T2 it can be any of the current existing ones, not just Trung, all of them except Finata is close enough to portal to Trung with a 1x2 portal, if it’s around Finata it would need a 1x3 portal, so with my excellent good luck as of late I’m sure my random world will be Finata! Wooo!
Based on my chat yesterday it is still random because of concerns around 10349734598237492 planets orbiting 1 planet (and not seeing them all not for technical server reasons) and more importantly people trying to game the system / abuse that setup or create a central super group of planets kind of like what Finata was with the portal complex and city. So I agree that would be a big concern on creating a central part of the Universe that become so compact with orbiting planets and the economy that other regions and locations suffer. But, if people can introduce some ideas on how we could “balance” that so we don’t create a “Finata effect” with Sovereign worlds then I do believe James would reconsider the decision.
It became mostly the center of the Universe for a while and a concentrated amount of people and some conflict of people trying to get in because of possible Footfall benefit, etc. Having planet selection could easily cause the same situation.
Ok, here’s what I can come up with that has enough separation between the 2 universe types, whilst still allowing them to be partially joined, so as not to adversely affect each other…
Only allow portals to be set up in their respective universes, not cross-universe. i.e. Creative Creative or Survival Survival.
The survival universe shows all worlds in the sky, including Creative worlds. Creative worlds are clearly marked/identified as such. The Creative universe only shows creative worlds in the sky.
Warps to and from the Creative universe are free.
Warping to a Creative world saves your last location in the Survival universe. Warping from a Creative world, only shows your last known location as an option and takes you back to that last location (or you can use your “free warp home” ability). This allows you to warp back to your original place in the Survival universe from any world in the Creative universe.
This should cover all the bases (I think) and allows purely Creative players to never have to grind for anything to get to their worlds. Likewise, Survival players can freely visit the Creative universe from any planet (if they have a saved location) or by selecting a visible planet in the sky.
But still random across the right group of planets tho, right? Not that my EU T2 rental world is next to Galan a gazillion blinksecs away!?
As in a T2 rental will be linked to a T2 public world, or if it’s a T7 to one of the T6’s. And am assuming it will also be linked to the same region.
My concern, however, is that all the T2 planets are close to each other, but a portal from Trung to Finata has to be 1x3 in size, the other EU T2 planets can use a 1x2.
I don’t mind if it’s not near Trung itself, I would be a teensy bit peeved if it randomly was plopped down at Finata and not any of the other T2’s!
It looks like he was just quoting himself from what I’m seeing. If you click on what you’re telling me it links to the OP. Not explicitly confirmation of a second wave.
But that’s horrible UX. The scenario we’re talking about where ‘Just warp to it’ is a solution has risen from the scenario in which portals between creative worlds don’t exist. So you’re paying coins for warp costs just to visit world in which you can’t get coins, and are expected to do so every time they want to visit a creative planet not your own. AND on top of that, you now also have to be friends with them (in a system where removing someone from your friends list doesn’t remove you from theirs)?
At that point, they might as well be in a separate universe, however much I think that that would be a poor solution.
Whilst true, that’s not an issue that exists specifically because of creative planets. It’s an issue that can exist just as easily with greater numbers of sovereign planets, and as such all of your questions need considered answers, irrespective of whether Creative planets occupy the sky or not.
Creative or Survival 
