Scout Archive

Borak,

I got your point - anyone who wants to know what he means, just head east of Coronet on Corellia (if you're on Bloodfin).

The point is that the best way to control this is through lots. Crafters don't want houses because they take up harvester space. Merchants want houses, because they give them a place for a vendor. I own our PA Hall - which takes up 9 lots by itself. So the exact numbers are going to fluctuate - you just can't assume that everyone is going to get a house and run with it. That's an unreasonable work case scenario. But your overarching point is valid - if the servers aren't capped a max number, when player cities and vehicles are implemented you are going to see a lot of random cities erupting in formerly pristine far off and secluded areas, which we as Scouts don't like.

We will, luckily, still have the non-build planets, but I certainly don't want Naboo to look like Coruscant.

B

Thanks.

I think the "lots for nature" as I'll call it is probably one the best ideas I've heard on these boards.

That's my number one goal for SAUS.

I pledge my 10 lots on Flurry to SAUS!

I think apartments in the city is a GREAT! Idea.... Would lag though, be a concern? I also really love the idea of semi permanent or more 'rustic' structures like log cabins/lean toos/teepees.

If we were to receive some sortof semi-permanent structure- I think we need to consider what we actually will use them for, other than 'looking cool'. I'm suspecting storage--- which would become an issue when you wanted to actually move the structure- what would become of the stored items? Would they take up backpack space in the standard way? If so... I don't really see a benefit other than looking cool...

What about the ability to turn a semi-perm structure into a pack animal? That way you could transfer all those hides/bones/whatever to town..... Certainly a little outside the 'believable', even within the Star Wars realm...

Kali aka Seena Lonewalker...................... Who just realized- am I the ONLY woman here posting??

Kal,

One of the few. But that won't stop the others from claiming you'rea 45 year old fat bald sex offender with a record.

B

LOLOLOL

Hehehe well I'm an extremely well preserved,well built,40 year old with a nefarious past- is that flamable? LOL

; )

Kali

Kali,

Yes.

Go read my some of my wedding threads.

B

---

BorakThunderclaw wrote:

I am paranoid. I was trying to drawa diagram illustarting where I think the whole thing is going but it got to tedious.

I don't want a house and I don't use a house. I either log out in camp or log off in town.

I'd like to know a few things. How many players per galaxy? How manylots (not just buildable lots)on any given planet? Each player gets 10 lots, correct?

Now only a certain number of playerscan be on at one time BUT all they players structures will be on at the same time.

I'm all for using lots for nature preserves. Excellent idea. So, we can have Player Preserves.

Also, in favor of apartments, they'd give people a place to put stuff without cluttering up the landscape.

I wish I could insert an image here to illustrate my point because I'm not explaining it well enough.

---

BorakThunderclaw,

I don't think we are on different sides of the issue here, it's just I seem to have slightly (well, more than slightly)more trust in the Devs than you do. You point out that the player built structures are in the game whether their owner is or not, quite correct. However, there will be a maximum number of players for a galaxy, there has to be a limit because we are talking about real hardware and real software running the game. I also think it is very likely that thepopulation capis far lower than the absolute maxium. I only recall Holo talking about it once, but the maxium population was about three times the projected maximum load. SoI thinkthe servers are wereoriginally considered"full" at 5000. If my memory is correct on both counts that means 15000 players * 10 lots each = 150000 lots can be used in the entire galaxy. That sounds like a lot (pun intentional), but I think a lot is supposed to be 10 squaregame meters. I don't have timeright nowto look up the size of each planet mapand add them. However it should come out to be far greater than 1500000. If I am incorrect in any of the numbers the basic algorithim holds, just substitute in the right variables.

Finally, I think what you are seeing in your part of Flurry is coloring your image of the rest of the galaxy (the Coperican Theorem really doesn't hold in such a small system). Some planets will ALWAYS be more crowded than others. For example, on most servers we will have to kiss significant portions of the "natural" landscape of Tatooine goodbye. It has just too many draws, and to a lesserextent, andfor some different reasons,parts ofCorellia and Naboo as well. Unless we can get real solutions like nature preserves and housing alternatives like apartments.

I'm all for many of these ideas. I'm a scout and throughout all of the planets that you can build on I see harvesters. The buildings I don't think are so much of a concern since they do end up in congregated areas and most people only build one or two houses. The real problem is harvesters. They're all over the place and they keep getting bigger. I'm waiting to walk to Deeja's Peak and have to go around a harvester "town" the whole way there.

I think there should be large tracts of no build zones in areas outside the cities to preserve them as wilderness. If the Devs won't do it, then when the bugs are worked out, give us scouts the ability to use our slots for preserves. Give us different size preserves at different levels. It doesn't even has to be scouts necessarily. You could give them to rangers to limit the numbers so the artisans aren't completely up in arms, but we should have some kind of ability to protect the wilderness we scouts treasure so much.

Zynyporinan

Good post, definetly a problem brewing for the future. Hopefully the onset of player cities will force most homes and shops into concerntrated areas and allow the wilderness to prevail. If not, those lone houses should come under frequent attack by bandits and large rampaging animals, enough so to make the cost of living in the wilds high enough to sop most of the urban sprawl.

Just a thought, I think it would be interesting to be able to claim your lots but without building on them. A deed for just land could be made by <insert class here> and then "preservations" could be made (heck, even put up signs like a national park)

-j

For those who haven't seen it yet.