The only world reset/wipe requests/discussion topic

[Thatguyintheback100]

I mean both ideas are pretty trash, I like resetting every year or so

[Pate]

I dont care when the next reset is, as long as it's asap

[Nightdawg]

I'd rather wait some extra months, just to be sure they don't change unbalanced mechanics mid world.

Like how everyone cheesed lots of mammoths through palisades, and after I cheesed one too, they removed pali cheesing

[Thatguyintheback100]

I dont care when the next reset is, as long as it's asap

following this world and the last one the reset will probably be in February or march, I wouldve played longer this world if BB hadn't set up two screens south of me after i had settled in for a week or two lol

[shotmichael]

I tried pitching a suggestion that may not go through, but...
Instead of resetting the world every 3 months -> create a new world every 3 months.
And instead of resetting characters -> delete the worlds that are a year old.

So there would be 4 worlds, 3 months apart in age, max age of 1 year.
Every 3 months there is a schedule world reset, and the new world has updated content.

People can play an older world until it inevitably resets, or jump to the newest one if they need a refresh.

And song side the 4 rotating worlds, we could have a 5th world that is meant to be more semi-permanent the same way worlds 1 through 12 have been... no way of knowing if it will last a few months or a few years.

[dullah]

might not be a good idea to scatter the already niche pop game in so many worlds.

What can be done, is a system like Path of Exile, where you have 'leagues' every 3 month or so, and characters fall back to "standard' once the league is over.

https://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/League

[shotmichael]

might not be a good idea to scatter the already niche pop game in so many worlds.

They wouldn’t be scattered. World resets usually see a large increase in number of players, which even if split between 4 worlds would be much more than we currently have in one alone.

But we wouldn’t be starting with 4 worlds anyway.
The real problem has been keeping players from quitting. Once a world progresses beyond the first 1-3 months, most new players don’t see a chance of catching up, and old player who died and have to start over don’t see the point.
And waiting for a world reset is awfully uncertain.

So we start with one world for that initial surge. Then in 3 months, the second world launch would capture all the players that were ready to quit. The ones currently doing well and happy, in the first world aren’t going to want to start over. They will want to continue feeling like a badass with their current character.
The idea is to give players a better option than to just quit. If we maintain a solid number of players and we have alternatives that promote trying again rather than quitting... the starting player base should withhold, which is already much more people than currently.. and it should even start to grow at a constant rate or exponentially. Until we reach a balance where as many people are joining as quitting.

Ultimately, this would help new players trying to join, because no one wants to first start playing only to feel like they are months behind everyone else.. and this will help keep the players who have been playing since the beginning (or toughened through the middle), who eventually quit because player base is too low, they reached an untimely demise, or they are craving a flat reset for everyone.

[saltyfish]

This World did accumulate too many changes that took game South... I would rather wait devs would *correct* the game and then create a new world.

[Jalpha]

What kinds of changes are you unhappy with?

[saltyfish]

Crop q cap and lack of metal spiraling. Initially it looked like good ideas, but these fell flat in view of the overall game play. I don't need spiraling, but some ways to boost metal quality is a glaring gap in the game mechanics.