Suggestion: Let anyone fertilize any LA

BruuD

Elite
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Posts
4,485
Location
Netherlands
Society
Ex Cons
Avatar Name
Ace "BruuD" of Spades
When the owner of LA's decides not to spend any more time in EU, the LA runs out of fertilizer and mobs stop spawning (for the large part).
Would be nice if players had the option to fertilize LA's that they don't own so that unique mob spawns don't die out.
 
When the owner of LA's decides not to spend any more time in EU, the LA runs out of fertilizer and mobs stop spawning (for the large part).
Would be nice if players had the option to fertilize LA's that they don't own so that unique mob spawns don't die out.

or.. dna drops in loot again, so landareas can be filled with other dna than neconu, exarosaur, argonaut or merp (the only dna that still drops currently)
 
Nice Idea.....but how is the landowner paying the guy that feeds the la ..when he doesnt come online???
 
I need to take a dump
where is your LA ?
 
i honestly like the Idea and it has been suggested many times in the past but the main reason I reckon why it hasn’t been implemented is because would require a total revamp of core mechanics of the game.

One simple solution I have, if the LA owner doesn’t stock on fertilizers will not receive any tax from ppl cycling, however assuming DNA still placed, the spawn will be Medium density at max

This should motivate LA owners to stock upon fertilizer. I’m order to get money and even if they don’t other players won’t be that much affected.
 
One simple solution I have, if the LA owner doesn’t stock on fertilizers will not receive any tax from ppl cycling, however assuming DNA still placed, the spawn will be Medium density at max

Wouldn't that be a (parcial) revamp of core mechanics, a change in the middle of an ongoing game?



The OP has a good point, but some questions do occur:
- Would any player just add fertilizer and continue hunting with the ongoing definitions?
- Would he have access to maturity and/or numbers definition?
- Could he/she have access to add (or even remove) existing DNA?

And this in turn, leads to new questions:
- Imagine the LA owner doesn't want the spawn altered.
- Imagine the LA owner wants to try the mining aspect of the LA without removing the existing DNA, to eventually change it back in the future.
- Imagine two different avatars want diverging definitions of the spawn, how would it work?
- The fertilizer added by avatar A would be used only by him/her? If avatar B added more fertilizer, would he/she be in charge of the definitions? Could the LA owner use any of the resulting IP also?

Maybe implementing this would need to have further study. Some pointers:
- a list definition on the LA terminal, where the LA owner would grant access to certain listed avatars to "manage" the definitions (like the lists in vehicles or apartments), and blocked to all other avatars;
- a lock/unlock on the LA terminal, where the LA owner could allow some actions from any avatar. Actions such as adding fertilizer, definition of numbers, definition of maturity, or other related, each would have a different button;
- a list of available IP points by avatar.
 
One simple solution I have, if the LA owner doesn’t stock on fertilizers will not receive any tax from ppl cycling, however assuming DNA still placed, the spawn will be Medium density at max.

This could be one of the best solutions i ever read but we can't forget that some LA owners want their LA to be miners only so, something need's to be added to offer them this possibility.
 
Just make it so you can spawn whatever mob, whatever maturity you want etc. in the event system... so you won't need an LA to hunt what you want, you'd just create your own solo event more or less.

If doing it with current system, make it so you can set the maturity level for the mobs that have dna on that LA that you are creating the event for.
 
They need to tie ores and enmatters to fertilizer on the gamble domes as well. One can just sit back and get their taxes without any effort. Maybe MA could restrict access to these areas until the Land lord does his or hers job. I realize there are instances such as John FOMA kalun where they are ill so in this case Maybe MA fertilizes land for them and bills them at a later date.

There would have to be a way for the landowner to prevent over fertilization as well as many LA are set up specifically for mining. Of course they could just remove DNA in that case.
 
OP got a good point, very anoying that many fairly good hunting LAs ran out of fertilizer and LA owners don´t care.
Especially for the unique mobs (FOMA domes: Dasp, Cornoanterion) this is really bad. Even worse that there is daily missions for exactly that mobs.

Even if MA make it possible that people can add fetilizer to a LA they don´t own, under no circumastance this players should have access to the DNA settings (spawn density, maturity).
LA owners did that settings for a reason and surely don´t want that changed.

Sidenote: If I buy a new car for 10k$ I don´t want everybody to have access to it, so why should I want that people have asccess to my LA DNA settings when I paid 10k$ for that LA.

What I would appreciate is, that if an LA is not fertilized, the system should automatically set hunting tax to 0% as soon as the LA runs out of fertilizer.
Why should someone get tax for not maintaining the LA ?
Why should hunters pay tax on an LA where seeking for next mob takes more time than actually shooting this mobs. (reminds me my last Phasm hunt)
If LA owner wants miners only then he should earn tax from miners only!

If an LA isn´t maintained a very long time (a year or so), the DNA could be moved from LA to auction. That way other LA owner can buy it and set up that mob at their LA.
Although that sounds good at first sight, there may be some issues with that, as some DNAs got sold for many k$ and the LA owner surely will be very pissed when he comes back online and the DNA isn´t there anymore.

The solution can´t be that easy.
Asuming what others mentioned, that DNA parts drop if LAs that hold that DNA aren´t fertilized, this could be exploited to dublicate special DNAs. (stop fertilizing untill new DNA is found, then fertilize again).

Anyways more DNA parts in loot would be very nice, not only for hunters also for LA owners.
There is lots of mobs, DNA simply doesn´t exist, there is DNAs that should exist (refinable parts known) but never anyone manage to generate that DNA due to missing parts (f.e. snablesnot).

A solution I could live really good with it would be the following:

If LA runs out of fertilizer, automatically set hunting tax to 0% and enable public event creation at lower cost than normal (noone gets tax for that events!). Keep this settings untill LA owver get back online, adds fertilizer and maybe change the settings (automatically increase the event creation cost to normal as soon fertilizer is added and/or tax rate changed by LA owner.
Change event creation:
Allow the event creator choose to have different maturity/density settings for existing DNAs for the duration of the event, therefor he has to pay some extra if setting is differnt to original LA settings (this should be a small fee only that could be linked to the duration of the event, f.e. 2 PED / 30min event lenght).

That way it would be possible to create events if someone wants to hunt mobs at LAs that are not fertilized with variable maturity/density settings, without feeding a lazy LA owner (hunting tax set to 0%).
 
What if all LA had instances attached like the neomex cave where the players could control spawn level and density?
 
Why should someone get tax for not maintaining the LA ?
Why should hunters pay tax on an LA where seeking for next mob takes more time than actually shooting this mobs. (reminds me my last Phasm hunt)
If LA owner wants miners only then he should earn tax from miners only!

If an LA isn´t maintained a very long time (a year or so), the DNA could be moved from LA to auction. That way other LA owner can buy it and set up that mob at their LA.

As a former landarea owner, I couldn't disagree with this more. A landarea is expensive enough to maintain. A lot of landarea owners do care.. but it's pretty damn expensive. DNA going back to auction? That's just not right. A lot of lands don't actually need to be fertilised. In the case of the phasm, I believe deathifier only has one, so yes, he has to add fertiliser for density now and then, which he doesn't at the moment.
if you have plenty of DNA, that works too, provided that the mob has enough maturity to global at young.
Before I sold my landarea, I had 5 neconu DNA on the land and one mourner, there were plenty of mobs to hunt.
An a neconu young is level 21.

This is the cost to setup a cheap event:

25 ped event creation
50 ped 1 hour rent
75 ped first prize
25 ped second prize
10 ped third prize
—–
185 ped cost

A normal hunting landarea has around 4% tax. That means every 1200 ped turnover pays 50 ped (the smallest amount payable) . Meaning you need 4440 ped turnover to break even.
Note that a landarea owner has to rent his own land if he wants to organise an event.
Now with 30 ish signups, normally around 8-14 actually showup. At 14 hunters with 75 dps you profit slightly, less hunters and it's not profitable at all. In my case I would get 190 ped the next day.. so a whopping 5 ped profit!

This is all without fertiliser cost. I had 5 neconu dna.. If I wanted maxed density it costs 600 ped per DNA to get it to max. and then 1 ped per DNA per day to keep it maxed. So In my case it was 3000 ped initially+ 5 ped per day.
And you need to add density if you want to organise events, because you want the hunters to be happy.

It's easy to shout at landarea owners, but the reality is, farming ain't easy.
It would help a lot if Mindark would stop making landarea owners renting their own land, and reduce the cost of fertiliser points. That would help a lot, because the way it's setup now is simply too expensive. That's why a lot of la owners run their events through the forum.


I agree that if a landarea event creation is set to public, other people could set events and add fertilizer for the duration of the event. But Mindark should rethink the rent cost/improvement point cost, because that is the bottleneck at the moment.

 
Last edited:
MA should supply the fertilizer to LA's that aren't being managed properly, pass along the cost of such management to the LA owner, with an extra fee, and withhold all tax collected during period of time MA managed the LA.

A penalty enforced by MA to all LA holders, for neglecting their LA's for say.... 12 - 15 months or so, might be a forfeiture of DNA on that LA and such DNA be inserted back into the loot pool.

MA has the ability to communicate with LA holders outside of game to stress the actions they will impose on neglected LA's. After all, shouldn't it be MA's ultimate responsibility to ensure the LA's are being managed properly?
 
As a former landarea owner, I couldn't disagree with this more. A landarea is expensive enough to maintain. A lot of landarea owners do care.. but it's pretty damn expensive. DNA going back to auction? That's just not right. A lot of lands don't actually need to be fertilised. In the case of the phasm, I believe deathifier only has one, so yes, he has to add fertiliser for density now and then, which he doesn't at the moment.
if you have plenty of DNA, that works too, provided that the mob has enough maturity to global at young.
Before I sold my landarea, I had 5 neconu DNA on the land and one mourner, there were plenty of mobs to hunt.
An a neconu young is level 21.

This is the cost to setup a cheap event:

25 ped event creation
50 ped 1 hour rent
75 ped first prize
25 ped second prize
10 ped third prize
—–
185 ped cost

A normal hunting landarea has around 4% tax. That means every 1200 ped turnover pays 50 ped (the smallest amount payable) . Meaning you need 4440 ped turnover to break even.
Note that a landarea owner has to rent his own land if he wants to organise an event.
Now with 30 ish signups, normally around 8-14 actually showup. At 14 hunters with 75 dps you profit slightly, less hunters and it's not profitable at all. In my case I would get 190 ped the next day.. so a whopping 5 ped profit!

This is all without fertiliser cost. I had 5 neconu dna.. If I wanted maxed density it costs 600 ped per DNA to get it to max. and then 1 ped per DNA per day to keep it maxed. So In my case it was 3000 ped initially+ 5 ped per day.
And you need to add density if you want to organise events, because you want the hunters to be happy.

It's easy to shout at landarea owners, but the reality is, farming ain't easy.
It would help a lot if Mindark would stop making landarea owners renting their own land, and reduce the cost of fertiliser points. That would help a lot, because the way it's setup now is simply too expensive. That's why a lot of la owners run their events through the forum.


I agree that if a landarea event creation is set to public, other people could set events and add fertilizer for the duration of the event. But Mindark should rethink the rent cost/improvement point cost, because that is the bottleneck at the moment.



Owners who can't afford to maintain their LA's or attract enough activity for it to pay for itself, should consider selling the LA or the DNA. LA owners knew, or should have known, what they were getting into in the 1st place. If you can't run or are tired of running the business, or can't do it profitably, get out of the business and sell it,

Just my .02pec
 
Owners who can't afford to maintain their LA's or attract enough activity for it to pay for itself, should consider selling the LA or the DNA. LA owners knew, or should have known, what they were getting into in the 1st place. If you can't run or are tired of running the business, or can't do it profitably, get out of the business and sell it,

Just my .02pec

OMG spoken like a true ass with zero empathy (just my .02pec). lol Not like all the facts of land area ownership are presented up front. A) MA doesn't provide a LA owners guidebook. B) When buying a LA not everyone is honest about the return or cost. And returns can be skewed with events done at loss, hunters compensated to grind on a LA for a couple months to boost returns pre LA sale...etc. C) There's no system for really auditing a LA's performance beyond a screenshot of payouts. There's no history of fertilization or associated costs, events (cost and profit), mob changes, unique avatars hunting on the area (and their names)...etc...etc.

I mean, with non-profiting land areas these people are trying to unload a $10,000 - $20,000 USD burden that's not making them money. They're not going to say "yeah give me $15,000 USD for this and expect it to lose you money or make like $10 a month in profit at best. These people don't want to lose their investment. Unloading it isn't as easy as just running to the TT. Some people spend MONTHS trying to unload their land area unsuccessfully.

Anyways, the LA owners shouldn't be the ones blamed here. IMO Mindark has dropped the ball as it's yet another system in the game that's never been fully implemented and polished. They are very great at starting new ideas but follow through has never been their strong suit.

When they came up with the system their primary thought was "how do WE make money regardless of if people hunt there or not" and they added all those extra costs and fees. And this made sense when the player base was very small and there weren't other planets...etc., but now these fees need to be rethought much like the apartment rental fees they used to have.
 
Why do people find it normal to just have someone else pay for something they want?

Would you like MA do something like: If someone has any item they don't use for a period of time, say one year, it goes back to the loot pool...


Disclaimer: I bought and inserted 3 argonaut DNA (not that cheap at the time) in my fertilizer free LA. I like the spawn as is, dispersed small argonauts that don't bother me that much when I fell like mining
 
Probably better to just put untaxed spawns of these mobs somewhere at least until the owner of rare/unique dna decides he wants to provide a spawn again.
 
I have 300k sung for sale... seriously. Pm me.
 
Back
Top