Community: The next world should be made permanent

[LadyGoo]

The thing is they do not seem to listen to votings and probably will not want to set up a precedent. They will listen if we will provide some proper statistics, analysis, videos, and pictures, though. Treat it like you're a seller (of your ideas) and have to convince the buyers (devs) to purchase your product. You will not be able to do that by calling your customers morons and pointing out their flaws in a harsh way.

[Granger]

... most players agree on that.

Proof?

if everyone is posting about it non-stop

The ones dense enough to actually do that will get special treatment quite quickly.

Seriously, there is a reason why requesting character wipes or map resets is seen as SPAM in The Rules, please be so kind to adhere to them even in case you don't get the reason why (or don't like it).

[ven]

I have been playing since world 2 non-stop from the beginning to the end of each world with no breaks. I can tell you that if they start world and say there will be no end to it I probably wont play. Usually at around this point in a world I have become decently strong and I go into maintenance mode where I just have a series of chores me and my villagemates who I play with do... we are each reliable so everything chugs along without too much time investment... by this point we have already spiraled/made our bone clay kilns as high as we wanted and made the best gear we could. We don't enjoy killing strangers so if no one is attacking us we just putter along.

but with endless progression and removal of the stat caps I don't really see much point in continuing trying to compete. a few worlds ago we could actually mostly keep up with the botters but botting has become so refined now and jorb/loftar plan to do nothing about it.

Exploring is only fun when there is resources to find and that is only possible in the first few months. people want a fresh start to try to do better then last world or try out being a miner instead of a farmer etc etc. Each world start has been fun and is always full of unique experiences. Jorb and loftar have added a lot of gameplay tailored to early game, there are no end game experiences that I can think of that are worth playing towards at this point.

Also if you think people would come back/stay if the world was permanent you are totally wrong. They will not. Server pop will always just continue to drop because there becomes less and less unique experiences to discover. When your a hermit with 500 melee and 500 unarmed and you are not a faggot who kills random newbies what do you have to look forward to each day when you login? Making curios and food to get even stronger. That's it, how fun.

This is not a game that can be persistent... and I know loftar wants it to be persistent but if he wants it that way then they need to remove the quality system and redsign the game mechanics from scratch. The regular folk who are not botting retards enjoy world resets so they can play on par with everyone else for a few months and have equal opportunity to claims nice resources and setup their bases.

I'd like to hear your opinion: if the world had mechanisms for self renewal without a reset, would that make a permanent world worth trying in your playstyle? Consider the unlikely scenario we got some of the following:
. Seasons, with changes to animal spawning, crop growth and forageable types.
. Weather and/or moon weeks, with temporary changes to minor elements, like water quality and appearance of new nodes.
. Server events, like destroying a portal, reforesting and decivilizing a random area, catching the most dryads.
. Server events giving everyone regular and temporary access to much smaller parallel worlds - ice world, ocean world, underworld, each with unique animals and biomes. Like current valhalla, just more thematic, unique and challenging.
. Infinite skills with with increasingly higher costs and new recipes or abilities.

[Potjeh]

None of that addresses his clearly expressed concerns over perennial worlds

[ven]

Not having something to do or look forward to once you reach the endgame? That is the point of the self renewal argument really.

[Popo13]

It is interesting to think about the other side of the coin when it comes to world resets resulting in lower activity in the current world.

However, even if the world is "permanent", who is going to want to start (or start over) in a world after a significant change that puts the newer player at an even bigger disadvantage relative to the players that are already established? For example, someone now entering world 9 will have to find starter LP without OP mirkwoods, raise stats without broken bonfires and easy mode satiation, and actually have to pace themselves when unlocking combat moves and hunting game. As if it weren't already hard enough to "catch up" in this game. As long as the game continues to have significant new development, worlds can only realistically last so long.

I'm not trying to imply that I count for anything more than a sample of 1, but I'll raise my hand as a latecomer that wouldn't be bothering with W9 if it weren't for the excitement of an eventual W10. I would take new development and inevitable world resets over a static, permanent world, hands down.

[Kaios]

What I don't understand is why anyone thinks new content and a world reset have to go hand in hand. Group A can agree that early game content is the most fresh and exciting, Group B understands that end-game becomes tedious and boring but the two groups can't use their brains to figure out where along this time line the interest starts to fade?

If end game is the most boring, if we lack end game content then why would you want to reset the world ever at any time before fixing that? You're just putting yourself in the exact same situation next time, the world resets and you have some fun derping around in the early game then the end-game comes along and it's RESET THE WORLD NOW without even thinking about why.

[LadyGoo]

However, even if the world is "permanent", who is going to want to start (or start over) in a world after a significant change that puts the newer player at an even bigger disadvantage relative to the players that are already established? For example, someone now entering world 9 will have to find starter LP without OP mirkwoods, raise stats without broken bonfires and easy mode satiation, and actually, have to pace themselves when unlocking combat moves and hunting game. As if it weren't already hard enough to "catch up" in this game. As long as the game continues to have significant new development, worlds can only realistically last so long.

On the other hand, the devs are addressing the issue already, by letting the kingdoms building objects that would grant a significant boost for the noobs.

[Kaios]

+84 bonus is not just helping the newbs lol, I said it before but I think these types of buffs are a bad idea. We really need something more along the lines of work speed and production bonuses, pure stat buffs are only going to benefit Kingdoms maintained by the largest faction(s) that are able to mass produce or collect the necessary materials. For example, 140 foul smoke/notes of symphony is a fuck ton and I have no clue how the hell you got so many other than the typical guess being bots or just lucked out at start of world when they were filled.

[LadyGoo]

than the typical guess being bots

God, if someone is doing something well, definitely there are bots involved. Typical Kaios/maze/insert a name

84 buffs took me a lot of energy to make and dozens of people trading for 3 weeks. I can send the chatlogs with every single person I have traded the guano and notes with. Not to mention the barterstand trades as well, that cost me the fortune.
Moreover, we were collecting guano, notes and foul smokes just in case from the beginning of the world, foreseeing possible game mechanics changes. I have even been breeding the pigs, while other villages wouldn't before the fep+2 path. Probably have the highest quality pigs atm.

Some proof screenshots: