Advance Notice for "Land Rush" Patches

[Recatek]

Today we had a patch that introduced Proia, a station with new lots for players to rent. These lots are of different size and value, and some are far more desirable than others based on their location. As soon as the patch went up, it created a "land rush" of players to acquire the best lots that they wanted. This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do and it happens in other MMOs all the time.

However, it would be nice if the time for this kind of very important patch is announced in advance.

This is an international game with players in (nearly) every time zone. Having an announced time means that everyone can at least try to move things around to be there for the "land rush". Without advance notice, the patch goes up in the middle of the night for some and puts them at a disadvantage -- a recurring one, since it's always going to be the same time zones. Even for those in your time zone, people aren't glued to their computers waiting for a sudden patch.

Does it matter now in CA? Not particularly.
Will it matter in EA, when we're playing "for real"? Absolutely.

Regardless, I think it would be a good practice to establish now rather than later.

 

[[QS] Combustible]

Or maybe in the future station lots can slowly be added in, instead of one big rush

 

[TheMarksman]

Perhaps sections should be opened up gradually based on timezones?

 

[Recatek]

The problem with gradually introducing lots is that even then, not all of the lots are the same value. Proia has only one "market cluster" at the bottom of the station. If you want a ship shop, or some other store, that’s where you want your lot to be for maximum traffic. The handful of large lots all near the market and ship shop went almost immediately. With finite lots in non-instanced world space, each has a specific value over or under every other, so it’s sort of an all or nothing thing.

On discord there were suggestions of an auction system (where you periodically have to re-bid on your lot) and/or a lottery system for selecting lots when new stations open up. I think both of these are good ideas for how to resolve this kind of land rush.

 

[Meetbolio]

The problem with gradually introducing lots is that even then, not all of the lots are the same value. Proia has only one "market cluster" at the bottom of the station. If you want a ship shop, or some other store, that’s where you want your lot to be for maximum traffic. The handful of large lots all near the market and ship shop went almost immediately. With finite lots in non-instanced world space, each has a specific value over or under every other, so it’s sort of an all or nothing thing.

On discord there were suggestions of an auction system (where you periodically have to re-bid on your lot) and/or a lottery system for selecting lots when new stations open up. I think both of these are good ideas for how to resolve this kind of land rush.

Having to check in every other week and re-bind your lot might be a good idea. Or some sort of check-in system where if you don't turn up at your lot for a long time, someone can snatch it.

(as someone who missed the Proia patch going live...)

 

[Recatek]

Bumping this thread because today’s patch (painting) had another unannounced land rush for new Proia lots. A bunch of interesting ideas in this thread, particularly for mechanics like auctions and a lottery system.

 

[Meetbolio]

Bumping this thread because today’s patch (painting) had another unannounced land rush for new Proia lots. A bunch of interesting ideas in this thread, particularly for mechanics like auctions and a lottery system.

Yeah. Couldn't snatch one once again.

 

[MyrddinE]

Here is a suggested mechanic for lots that might help (though pre-announcing is still smart): Secret Auctions and Depreciating Lot Value

First, make it so that lot costs drop by 10% per week. So if nobody contests your ownership of the lot, its price slowly drops.

Anyone can put a bid in on a lot at the lot terminal. Only the lot owner can see the current top bid for their lot; when you enter a bid you won't know if its high enough or not. The lot owner can always outbid the top bidder if they want to keep their lot... or if they don't outbid them, on the second weekly rent where they have not beaten the top bidder they GET that rent amount as a payout and the lot transfers ownership along with all of its contents.

This gives players ONE WEEK minimum, if they choose not to keep the lot, to remove any valuable equipment or lot contents. Anything they don't remove transfers to the new owner.

As an example... I rent a lot for 100k / week. The second week it's 90k. Third week it's 81k, and so forth.

A month later someone bids 200k for the lot. Since I want to keep it, and I'm willing to pay that amount I outbid them at 201k before the second weekly rent period. Other than my rent going up, nothing changes. A week later my rent depreciates to 180k, and so on.

A year from now, after the occasional bid for my lot that I match, someone bids 10 million per week. I'm not making enough profit from the lot to be worth that kind of weekly rent, so I don't outbid it. In 3 days my rent comes due... and nothing changes yet, because I have to leave the bid unbeaten for TWO rent collection periods. However, by leaving the rent unbeaten for the first week I gain the ability to rent a second lot; activating that second lot prevents me from outbidding the current lot (I can only have one active rent, even if temporarily I have control of two lots), so I've committed to the move.

Over the next week I dismantle my most of my current base and move it over to a new lot. At the end of the week the moneybags who bid 10M clams the lot, and now pays the new, higher rent moving forward. I get the 10M bid in my bank, which helps offset the costs of moving.

In this manner high-value lots will have rent that matches their value, because other players will bid for the lot and either get it or force the current owner to outbid them to keep it. Low value lots will drop in price over time automatically. This will lower the advantage that land grabs have... yes, you'll get the choice spot but you'll need to pay a premium price to keep it.

 

[Kap]

Personally against (and don't see the need) for the above detailed system. If someone wants a lot someone else owns, then they can buy it when it becomes available due to inactivity or make an offer to the current owner.

 

[MyrddinE]

Personally against (and don't see the need) for the above detailed system. If someone wants a lot someone else owns, then they can buy it when it becomes available due to inactivity or make an offer to the current owner.

The problem with what you describe is that it's like rent control in the real-world; housing scarcity gives early arrivers a huge advantage that never goes away as long as they keep playing. They always have that choice lot, at the default rent, forever. Why would I accept your bid on my lot if it's a great spot at a great price? I wouldn't! And so the early bird doesn't get the worm... they get all the worms, forever, because their lot is in the best spot.

But the more complex system allows that lot to get priced appropriately; others bidding on the lot drives up the rent (or if nobody is bidding, the rent drops down). It will naturally create high rent areas and low-rent zones without the devs needing to do any work at all. And if someone abandons their lot, they'll lose it to a more active player (though they'll need to be fully AFK for over a week) ensuring that property won't get hoarded by inactive players; this is important in a player-driven economy.

 

[Kap]

I just don't like how one particular rich player, or faction, could force out people from their homes under that, should they wish.
I go bid 100m (Or whatever is enough to crush them financially) on someone's extremely elaborate factory or ship shop, and now they pretty much have no choice but to dismantle their stuff and move. A move which might not be possible without kicking someone else out of their home. And the circle repeats.

This is not acceptable in my opinion and not fun gameplay. Even if the lot owner does get the 100m bid in the bank, their assets and time might be worth more.. But they simply *can't* pay 100m, 90m, 81m etc etc. I see it as an open invitation to bullying and griefing.

How I'd like to see rent/lots work:
Devs decide rent on SZ stations. If you own a lot, you own it till you don't (Stop paying rent, accept lump sum to trade ownership). Yes, the early birds do get the worms, and that's fine.

Players and factions can do whatever they want with rent on their own stations. Make it free. Boot people out. Anything goes.

And as a general response to Recatek's post; Auctions, auctions auctions auctions. It's NEEDED before EA.

 

[MyrddinE]

I agree that it could be very disruptive. What if rents were monthly (or every 4 weeks) rather than weekly? Then the lead time to match a bid would be far larger, making disruptions rarer. They would still occur, just less often. And the disruption would primarily be in high-value territory, not in the side sections.

A common problem on any game where territory can be claimed is low-value squatters. It's a big issue; someone claims a prime spot, and builds a wooden hut. Then they don't log in for six months.

There are a lot of ways to combat this, and my way doesn't have to be the best way or the only way. But I think we need some way that is player-driven to drive rents up in high-value territory and allow for the reclaiming of underutilized lots.

 

[Kap]

I agree that it could be very disruptive. What if rents were monthly (or every 4 weeks) rather than weekly? Then the lead time to match a bid would be far larger, making disruptions rarer. They would still occur, just less often. And the disruption would primarily be in high-value territory, not in the side sections.

A common problem on any game where territory can be claimed is low-value squatters. It's a big issue; someone claims a prime spot, and builds a wooden hut. Then they don't log in for six months.

There are a lot of ways to combat this, and my way doesn't have to be the best way or the only way. But I think we need some way that is player-driven to drive rents up in high-value territory and allow for the reclaiming of underutilized lots.

I think a simple way to solve the squatters is to require the user to deposit credits into some account on the lot, and it can hold max 2(?) weeks of rent, something like that.

As long as there's no way to 'kick out' some active player from his home, just because you have bigboy money, then I am happy.

 

[MyrddinE]

Note I didn't say inactive squatters... I said low value. I would prefer that rich, active companies with deep pockets can outbid smaller outfits for choice lots.

Note that this only applies to NPC lots... the developer-limited areas in the noobie zone. If we have 100,000 players competing for ~500 lots on Proia then 'first come first serve' is a really crappy way of distributing them. There are certainly downsides of the instability that brings, but I think the upsides (automatic lot valuation, high player investment in lots) outweighs the negatives.

 

[Verbatos]

Here is a suggested mechanic for lots that might help (though pre-announcing is still smart): Secret Auctions and Depreciating Lot Value

First, make it so that lot costs drop by 10% per week. So if nobody contests your ownership of the lot, its price slowly drops.

Anyone can put a bid in on a lot at the lot terminal. Only the lot owner can see the current top bid for their lot; when you enter a bid you won't know if its high enough or not. The lot owner can always outbid the top bidder if they want to keep their lot... or if they don't outbid them, on the second weekly rent where they have not beaten the top bidder they GET that rent amount as a payout and the lot transfers ownership along with all of its contents.

This gives players ONE WEEK minimum, if they choose not to keep the lot, to remove any valuable equipment or lot contents. Anything they don't remove transfers to the new owner.

As an example... I rent a lot for 100k / week. The second week it's 90k. Third week it's 81k, and so forth.

A month later someone bids 200k for the lot. Since I want to keep it, and I'm willing to pay that amount I outbid them at 201k before the second weekly rent period. Other than my rent going up, nothing changes. A week later my rent depreciates to 180k, and so on.

A year from now, after the occasional bid for my lot that I match, someone bids 10 million per week. I'm not making enough profit from the lot to be worth that kind of weekly rent, so I don't outbid it. In 3 days my rent comes due... and nothing changes yet, because I have to leave the bid unbeaten for TWO rent collection periods. However, by leaving the rent unbeaten for the first week I gain the ability to rent a second lot; activating that second lot prevents me from outbidding the current lot (I can only have one active rent, even if temporarily I have control of two lots), so I've committed to the move.

Over the next week I dismantle my most of my current base and move it over to a new lot. At the end of the week the moneybags who bid 10M clams the lot, and now pays the new, higher rent moving forward. I get the 10M bid in my bank, which helps offset the costs of moving.

In this manner high-value lots will have rent that matches their value, because other players will bid for the lot and either get it or force the current owner to outbid them to keep it. Low value lots will drop in price over time automatically. This will lower the advantage that land grabs have... yes, you'll get the choice spot but you'll need to pay a premium price to keep it.

This idea would encourage griefing and trolling by uprooting someone from a place they probably spent time and hard work building up, it would be like being able to buy someone's ship off of them and fly away in it without their consent or choice, it's just a little silly IMO.

My idea of a good system would be to make it so that you actually have to manually pay rent by going over to the terminal every week or month or so and depositing money, it would stop people from just going permanently AFK over their lots and letting it sit. And besides, no one is going to buy a large block lot and just squat in it, it would cost far too much money for that to be viable. You actually have to be using the lot for something or else its just a hole that you have cut in your pocket.

Also, allowing the ultra-rich factions and clans to simply buy out the competition wouldn't be very fun unless you are sitting on piles of money yourself.

 

[MyrddinE]

This idea would encourage griefing and trolling by uprooting someone from a place they probably spent time and hard work building up

Think about the game you're in... at any time someone can fly up and shoot your extremely expensive ship full of holes. Even if they don't destroy you or capture you, the amount of time and effort needed to repair even a few seconds of gunfire from an enemy is immense (relative to similar games). This is a cut-throat game of eat-or-be-eaten, and I think it's completely within the spirit of the game to extend that to property as well.

 

[Verbatos]

Think about the game you're in... at any time someone can fly up and shoot your extremely expensive ship full of holes. Even if they don't destroy you or capture you, the amount of time and effort needed to repair even a few seconds of gunfire from an enemy is immense (relative to similar games). This is a cut-throat game of eat-or-be-eaten, and I think it's completely within the spirit of the game to extend that to property as well.

I meant while in the safezone.

 

[CalenLoki]

I like the idea of out-bidding someone's lot. We have limited amount of (well located) lots on dev-owned stations.
Also inflation/deflation is a thing, so prices shouldn't be static to begin with.

But IMO it should put more costs and restrictions on the new lessee.
1. They should pay the previous lessee for all the components and modules that are built on the lot, based on current market prices of ores/materials/components + assembly cost (i.e. +200% of material cost).
Building on the lot may be worth much more than the rent, and their cost is not tied with lot location, so simply getting one week of rent most likely wouldn't cover it.
2. They should be obliged to pay that new, higher rent for a long period of time before they can abandon it. (I.e. paying up-front for 6 months). Although someone can take the lot earlier than that by outbidding them. Then they'd get part of that up-front payment back.