Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Deux question 1:

Pelleman

Pelleman

Dominant
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Posts
422
Location
Ostrowiec Świętokrzyski, Poland
Avatar Name
Deux Pelleman Ex
Deux question 1: Dead landareas

No names given but some landareas in the universe are not taken care of by the LA owner.
I think there should be some obligations when a person owns a LA that it is taken care of.
I like doing the daily hunting missions on Calypso, and quite often I get mobs which are in areas
where the LA owner maybe hasent done anything for lets say a year, it is then very hard to find
the mobs and I dont know how the bad driven LA is affecting the lootpool.
Maybe some penalty and if the LA owner dont care for lets say a month, the LA is temporarely taken
over by you guys at Mindark.
And maybe some logic can by coded in the routine that randomly gives out Daily missions that there
is some kind of check if the mob are available.
 
Last edited:
We are aware of the issue of untended Land Areas, and have discussed possible ways to address it by encouraging more active Land Area management and promotion. Any solution would of course need to protect the interests of the LA deed holders.
 
A very double edged sword this one and i understand your concerns.

I would propose something like an improved loot quality ( mining/hunting) based on activity of an LA. This would certainly promote LA's from becoming defunct and would incentivize good LA management.
 
Dennis|MindArk said:
We are aware of the issue of untended Land Areas, and have discussed possible ways to address it by encouraging more active Land Area management and promotion. Any solution would of course need to protect the interests of the LA deed holders.
Click to expand...

Could some more land area owners perhaps contribute some ideas here, and have further response given to this subject? I notice a lot of the other threads are not being revisited with the detail they need to fully establish our confidence.
 
The big thing that prevents/stops many players from hunting in LA is because of the ancient question.

Does the % cut the LA owner take directly or indirectly affect the overall TT return from players hunting/mining on said LA?

Meaning let's say Player A cycles 100,000 PED in LA. If he's expected to get 95% TT return, and the LA has 5% tax, does this mean that he will actually get 90% TT return, and the LA owner will get his 5% tax?

This ancient question has stopped many players from playing on LA because most people don't wanna lose that huge amount of loot over longterm.
 
As a former landarea owner, let me state that the ingame event system is hard to make profitable for a Landowner. This is due to the fact that the Landowner has to pay rent for his own landarea. There would be a lot more Activity if the rent was removed.
These peds could be invested in density and maturity.
 
Psynergy said:
Could some more land area owners perhaps contribute some ideas here, and have further response given to this subject? I notice a lot of the other threads are not being revisited with the detail they need to fully establish our confidence.
Click to expand...

Actually I am not an LA owner, but my solution would be:

If a deed holder did not log in for an extended time (f.e. half year), set the tax at his LA to 0% and auto fertilize it to medium maturity and density, so the comunity can have at least the mobs at this LA to hunt, while the LA owner does not lose his asset (but dont get interest because not active). Send him an E-Mail that his LA tax is reset to zero and he will not earn any interest untill he log in and manages his LA again.
Actually I receive E-Mail aswell, when I dont log in for two weeks, it shouldn´t be a big thing.

As soon LA owner come back online, he can manage the LA as he wants it and set the tax back as he wants it.

That way the actual problems with availability of FOMA mobs and several planet side LAs would be solved.
 
Psynergy said:
Could some more land area owners perhaps contribute some ideas here, and have further response given to this subject? I notice a lot of the other threads are not being revisited with the detail they need to fully establish our confidence.
Click to expand...

Captain Jack has a thread somewhere on some ideas to make running promotional events more enticing. I agree with the ideas he's listed. Added to that & as Spawn has pointed out the existing event system is very limited. Some of my thoughts on the event system:

- allow for longer running events with a more reasonable price tag. It would be great if calendar month events could be facilitated in game based on globals, total loot etc.
- as jack pointed out - add tokens of a sort. I'd love an event where there are three tokens up for grabs in the event timeframe for prizes.

Back to the question posted by Deux. In my opinion penalties for unused LAs shouldnt be implemented. LAs are impacted by many factors outside of a LA owners realm of control - MA Events being the biggest contributor imho. I'd rather look at rewarding those that are active in some way shape or form. Possibly a shared promotional pot based on all LA turnover that is then automatically allocated to LAs (performance based) as once off events funded by that pot. I do know thats just a crazy idea & unlikely to ever see the light of day.
 
microdot said:
Captain Jack has a thread somewhere on some ideas to make running promotional events more enticing.
Click to expand...

Although Jacks ideas are great and would surely improve the ability to promote better events, it will not solve the issue with LA/Dome deeds sitting at inactive accounts.
 
Spawn said:
As a former landarea owner, let me state that the ingame event system is hard to make profitable for a Landowner. This is due to the fact that the Landowner has to pay rent for his own landarea. There would be a lot more Activity if the rent was removed.
These peds could be invested in density and maturity.
Click to expand...

The rental fee actually is returned in the form of *taxes.
The event creation fee, however, is not. That 25 PED event creation fee often eats up the day's profit after accounting for prizes.

*This is a feature which I think needs to be adjusted. Rental fees should be distributed in a separate column in the PED flow center because the way it is currently set up it is very easy to manipulate the apparent ROI on an LA by creating fake events for the purpose of showing a high tax income.
 
GoNi said:
Although Jacks ideas are great and would surely improve the ability to promote better events, it will not solve the issue with LA/Dome deeds sitting at inactive accounts.
Click to expand...

Agreed and Tbh, I’m mixing two diff probs here and shouldn’t. The ability to promote better could help stop LA owners from giving up.

For dead LA’s I’d say add decay to the unfed DNA’s, to the point they expire (over a very long period). Once expired the DNA parts are added back to the loot pool (wherever they came from)
 
Dennis|MindArk said:
We are aware of the issue of untended Land Areas, and have discussed possible ways to address it by encouraging more active Land Area management and promotion. Any solution would of course need to protect the interests of the LA deed holders.
Click to expand...

protect my interest.
thanks
mwah
 
Your assumption would seem to be that LAs only remain unfertilised out of owner laziness or spite.

Maybe the mining is good there and it is better to have miners rather than hunters - that is their choice..they paid for the right to choose.

How long would you deem their absence to reach the point where action is taken ? week, month, 6 months ?
Maybe they are dealing with issues in RL, and the game has had to take a back seat - would you penalise someone for that ? There will therefore always be some areas where the owner for whatever reason has taken a break (holidays/accidents/work commitments/bereavement/military deployment to name a few)

Owning an LA is not easy and requires a lot of work to keep it well stocked for hunters, to offer events and run them.
When you have walked a mile in their shoes....
Until then if you don't like it there, there is the rest of the universe to explore

Oh and just to be clear.. I do not, never have and have no future plans to own an LA
 
not naming any deathifiers or biggest landholders in all calypso or any treasure island owners. i wont hunt there because its dead. he wont fix it because he's spiteful . i can't see any thing good coming out of that situation. nor will it ever change..i wonder if NI is the same...has anyone even heard from these guys lately?
 
Granny Rowan said:
Your assumption would seem to be that LAs only remain unfertilised out of owner laziness or spite.

Maybe the mining is good there and it is better to have miners rather than hunters - that is their choice..they paid for the right to choose.

How long would you deem their absence to reach the point where action is taken ? week, month, 6 months ?
Maybe they are dealing with issues in RL, and the game has had to take a back seat - would you penalise someone for that ? There will therefore always be some areas where the owner for whatever reason has taken a break (holidays/accidents/work commitments/bereavement/military deployment to name a few)

Owning an LA is not easy and requires a lot of work to keep it well stocked for hunters, to offer events and run them.
When you have walked a mile in their shoes....
Until then if you don't like it there, there is the rest of the universe to explore

Oh and just to be clear.. I do not, never have and have no future plans to own an LA
Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying here Granny. Especially the 'a lot of work to keep it well stocked' part!

some thoughts:
-I'd say a year is a long enough time to let the DNAs go (let them decay & be released back to the loot pool). Within a year there should be enough time to spark some activity should an LA owner have other real world issues.

-I think the mining point is very valid, but needs to be balanced against 'unique' mobs that nobody can hunt. I dont have constructive suggestions, but will think on it.

- L DNAs - i'd really like L DNAs (as an addition to what we have now). Not quite sure if they'd be L based on days, or number of mobs in total, but either could work. It's something that would spice up what the LA owners could offer hunters. It would also be something to boost the economy through part sales against competing owners.
 
microdot said:
some thoughts:
-I'd say a year is a long enough time to let the DNAs go (let them decay & be released back to the loot pool). Within a year there should be enough time to spark some activity should an LA owner have other real world issues.

-I think the mining point is very valid, but needs to be balanced against 'unique' mobs that nobody can hunt. I dont have constructive suggestions, but will think on it.

- L DNAs - i'd really like L DNAs (as an addition to what we have now). Not quite sure if they'd be L based on days, or number of mobs in total, but either could work. It's something that would spice up what the LA owners could offer hunters. It would also be something to boost the economy through part sales against competing owners.
Click to expand...

Well do you know how much some LA owners paid for their DNAs?
Ask Deathifier owner of TI and several other LAs about the costs for rar or even unique DNAs.
Now he has a reason why he don´t fertilize his lands, and as Rowan pointed out, its his decision to do so.
Actually I don´t think is really inactive, speak he log in every here and then, just to be on the save side, so any solution for inactive accounts wont apply onto him anyways.
Same for the many pure mining LAs, where owners are not inactive. Its up to them not to add fertilizer, and nothing MA can or should do about that.

Another things is the deeds where even friends dont know what really happened to the owner.
If this deed owners dont answer the EMails of friends, we cant expect this deed owners answer EMails from MA.
So what to do, what to think. What happend. Is he still alive, is he in hospital maybe koma, or just on the LONG walk (you know crocodile dundee?). How long will it take untill he comes back? Will he come back at all?
What would happen if MA really purges his account and puts the deeds back into game?
Should MA really go that far?
What would you think if it happens to you. Koma for 3 years, wake up and everything you owned is lost ? I surely wouldn´t be happy!

So I would say, dont purge this accounts, dont remove the DNAs!
Even setting the tax to 0% might be not very nice!

Maybe just set the hunting tax to 0% and spawn the mobs as last known fertilizer set was given, or even leave the hunting tax as it is and add fertilizer paid by the LAs income as per last DNA setting?

Its a really difficult problem!

Without consulting a solicitor to make sure we cant get any legal issues I wouldn´t do anything if in MAs shoes.
I know everybody signed the ToU and EULA, so MA may be on the save side. I say MAY BE, as not every ToU/EULA can stand in a court and MAY BE declaired as illegal if it comes hard by hard.
I wouldn´t want to take that risk in MAs position.

Its all easy to say if it is NOT YOUR money involved!
 
These inactive or spiteful Land Area owners take the fun out of the game. The concept of Land Areas was to give players an opportunity to become partners with MA by making a significant investment and then owning a small piece Entropia it which they can manage and collect small fees off of other's activities on the Land.

If they do not wish to play an active role then they should just buy CLDs and collect passive income. Let those who want to create events and fun for the community own the Land and manage it.
 
Spawn said:
As a former landarea owner, let me state that the ingame event system is hard to make profitable for a Landowner. This is due to the fact that the Landowner has to pay rent for his own landarea. There would be a lot more Activity if the rent was removed.
These peds could be invested in density and maturity.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I personally would actually invest in a land area if events didn't cost money to run on your own land area. It should be a right and feature given to increase player content, instead of something taxed by the company:scratch2:


I might also add the cost in fertilizer and imposing a fee on the land area owners doesn't seem to be a wise choice in my opinion. To upgrade the spawns, ot add content, they should have to pay in some form or others(changing DNAs, adding instances, teleporters, etc.).
Landareas were introduced to encourage players to invest in and customize/upgrade the game. When a fee was placed on fertilizers and event creation, instead of encouraging us to spend money on fun events blasting away, it removed grease from the wheel that otherwise would encourage us all to cycle more money and make far more than the fertilizer fees for Mindark.

There are just too many unnecessary fees on things that were introduced that should instead focus on encouraging us to have fun content to cycle peds on. Events, fertilizer, etc.

I think maintenance costs should be removed entirely, so the community doesn't pay when a land area owner doesn't 'fund' his land area, we just get the same mobs over and over.

However I do think there should be rewards to things for land area owners who invest in constant upkeep of their land area, however.


Aloisius said:
not naming any deathifiers or biggest landholders in all calypso or any treasure island owners. i wont hunt there because its dead. he wont fix it because he's spiteful . i can't see any thing good coming out of that situation. nor will it ever change..i wonder if NI is the same...has anyone even heard from these guys lately?
Click to expand...

Code:
Yeah it's really sad. Spiteful action by the community members who purchase assets like land areas that affect public reception of the game quality should be protected against. I felt the life sucked out of me when I went on Treasure Island and saw it shut down and then found all these land areas with nothing on them and no updates.
 
Last edited:
Are the mining resources found on LAs controlled in any way by the LA owner? If not, perhaps there may be something worth looking in to for the future?

What about the types of trees that are able to be harvested on the LA?

Always thought it weird that Land Ownership in game was not quite like the real world where the Farmer can put things in to the ground such as seeds to grow certain types of crops... DNA is similar to that I suppose, but well... maybe something else can make it more like real life? There's a lot that harvesting and gardening may have to offer in the next decade?
 
GoNi said:
Actually I am not an LA owner, but my solution would be:

If a deed holder did not log in for an extended time (f.e. half year), set the tax at his LA to 0% and auto fertilize it to medium maturity and density, so the comunity can have at least the mobs at this LA to hunt, while the LA owner does not lose his asset (but dont get interest because not active). Send him an E-Mail that his LA tax is reset to zero and he will not earn any interest untill he log in and manages his LA again.
Actually I receive E-Mail aswell, when I dont log in for two weeks, it shouldn´t be a big thing.

As soon LA owner come back online, he can manage the LA as he wants it and set the tax back as he wants it.

That way the actual problems with availability of FOMA mobs and several planet side LAs would be solved.
Click to expand...

This is a good idea imo +Rep
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top