The only world reset/wipe requests/discussion topic

[srt66]

And next year, we play the underworld
The atmosphere is destroyed, the ground is hot, we cannot survive on the ground, we live underground, eat mushrooms,
In order to stay alive, we must keep digging, and the more terrifying species hide deeper...
I am redundant

[delfer8]

If they offerer private servers i know a few people who would pay. Then the dev's wouldn't need to split the community or pay for extra servers. We the players could do that. Plus it be less drama and less toxicity, with players able to control their wl and only playing with those they want to play with. Plus the devs wouldn't need to handle reset threads as much as player would have the option to reset themselves.

But that's pointless since they like drama and they use the game as a social experiment lol, as they demostrated many times in the past.

[jock]

If they offerer private servers i know a few people who would pay. Then the dev's wouldn't need to split the community or pay for extra servers. We the players could do that. Plus it be less drama and less toxicity, with players able to control their wl and only playing with those they want to play with. Plus the devs wouldn't need to handle reset threads as much as player would have the option to reset themselves.

But that's pointless since they like drama and they use the game as a social experiment lol, as they demostrated many times in the past.

I think sometimes in game dev, you realise what you aimed for or wanted isn't whats is right. Haven for all it's flaws is one of my favourite designed games. Some of the systems are brilliant ( looking at you feps/ quality). But the current systems don't fit as an mmo in their current form and that is ok. It's why we ittrrate and try new things but these same systems that often lead to a panic rush to the top, mass botting, toxicity and drama would fit in a private world. Where the would remove much of that determined grinding anguish from player, most of which comes from the endless feeling of being behind; behing vulnerable or worse. Irrelevant.

I do commend the game loftar and jorb have made for all the stick they get. They have inspirer us all to have a deep almost stockholm induced love for it, or at least for what we all individually hope it will become. I think there is something here that should be tested and considered, maybe even trialled and discussed by the devs. What is the downside to offering this choice if it is still economically viable?

How many premium tokens/ player subs would it need to be viable?
What new data and feedback would you see?
What would the server chart numbers look like for multiple servers?
What "rules"/ systems would players impose on themselves when they hold the Wl
Etc

It be a really interesting experiment and really interesting to see what happens to the community.

[Sevenless]

It be a really interesting experiment and really interesting to see what happens to the community.

It'd be sad to see the MMO in haven die. I really hate microshards mmos with <100 players per server cap.

[jock]

It be a really interesting experiment and really interesting to see what happens to the community.

It'd be sad to see the MMO in haven die. I really hate microshards mmos with <100 players per server cap.

So the main server anyway?

Its mostly bots. If anything we could see more player enjoying haven. With the server having a limit of 2kish players online. With more servers we would have a higher cap and with less pressure to bot or rush quality. Player longevity would increase, alongside slower progression due to lower overall numbers and more world space to explore for people.

[TheServant]

Maybe september or something?

I'm really busy in real life atm, wish i had time to play a bit. Maybe i'll catch a world reset!

[jacob232]

i think being able to link multiple hosted servers together using a central map would be interesting (players could wipe their 'world' at will and the central server could continue as is) the hub world would have a new portal open up at either a set location, or a random one forcing each player base to find their way through said hub world.

would this likely be extremely annoying to implement? probably

[Mashadar]

i think being able to link multiple hosted servers together using a central map would be interesting (players could wipe their 'world' at will and the central server could continue as is) the hub world would have a new portal open up at either a set location, or a random one forcing each player base to find their way through said hub world.

would this likely be extremely annoying to implement? probably

I don't see much point in wiping anything if people with overpowered stats from other worlds can then enter that new world and bring in high end items.
But it might work as long as you can't retain your items and stats when exiting your current world. Not sure if that's what you meant.

[Pills]

I don't see much point in wiping anything if people with overpowered stats from other worlds can then enter that new world and bring in high end items.

^ this.

Honestly the current cycle is perfect imo. The only downside is when the devs aren't ready to wipe when all of the players are.

Most people playing this game are doing it with friends, even if its just 2 or 3 friends. They'll play at launch, hammer it for a couple of weeks/months, get through all the content and move on to something else, then come back a year later looking for the same fix.

Same with other sandbox games, its just the cycle that is pretty standard now in the games market. Though I do also think resets shouldn't be scheduled in a calender way in advance and what the devs are doing is the right call on waiting until there is something significantly new because you still want new world to feel new.

[CyxoB]

Honestly the current cycle is perfect imo.

current cycle unbearable dull boredom
skill cap 300 and wipe every 3 months will make it perfect