Dynamic POT's

It's an Engineer vs. Artist argument.

It has more to do with the correct feeling of a scene and yes the "feeling" of a scene does matter and does exist.

Take the small bear cave for instance. If you made that cave the size of a metropolis and still only had 2 bears in it and a corpse, it's likely most people would miss the relevant content. They would also not feel a sense of danger since they are not "trapped" in a confined space with a bear.

A holdfast in a metropolis looks like a child in adult pants. While residents may want to locate themselves in the interesting areas of the current scene, they can't spread out that far if they want to create a feeling of a tight knit holdfast.

230 Towns all the same size and feel regardless of the purchased square feet inside is going to go down as the worst, ugliest, most repetative, boring and ignorable content in the game.

 

While I get what you are hinting at, this is also a non-issue.

First is that it takes a lot of time and effort to get such placement right. So people are unlikely to do such on a whim.

Second is that as soon as players have claimed such lots and started their own deco they would be tremendously angry if someone booted them just to redesign the town.


So the only realistic scenario is for towns which designate a certain number of the lots for this. Which means that the town itself remains always as a permanent part and that only some areas would change to accomodate events and festivities.

To which there is real life historical precedent for events and such that did this. It was routinely done all through the late middle ages, renaissance through victorian era up into the modern day.

For the grand jousting tournaments of the high middle ages you'd build whole villages and tear them down afterwards. Even smaller ones would build a couple of buildings like the tilt, or a barn, or just some cover for the audience in case of wheather.
Trade fairs and grand markets, built from scratch close to a population center and then torn down, started in the high middle ages and evolved into what they are today.
Festivities and such would regularly require buildings and such to be erected.


So I'd turn this around and claim the complete opposite: towns that are completely static in their layout and never changes are the ones that break with immersion.


For instance a town could one month sport a Circus, with tents and such in a number of smaller lots with wagons and shacks and all.
Then the next month all of that could be gone and instead there is a visiting Airship, in a big city lot.

Just like with all player freedom, some will use this tastefully which will add to immersion and RP, others will be avoided.

 

All of this and much much more is already planned in my POT Lux Sanctuary. A lot of it we have already tried out and made proof-of-concepts for.

For example I've fixed houses with deco for specific RP events and such. Some of which I've made lists of deco needed to quickly throw up something similar again. So if anyone wants an RP house quickly for an event I probably have a plan already on how to do that.

Here in the FAQ you can see those plans layed out a year ago:
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/lux-sanctuary.15447/
"1/3 of the lots are reserved for visitors & visiting events. (Details below)."

You should also check out 4B's plans for the Island of Wonders which is even more streamlined towards a Fun Fair.

If you are unsure about your plans I'd recommend you getting involved in either project instead of starting one of your own from scratch.
Unless of course you are coming to the table with a whole guild or a bunch of friends and would like to run something specifically because it is your own thing.


This is our latest iterative trial in Lux using the Dynamic Lot placement
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...s-the-daedalusian-market-concept-trial.37032/
Please note in those pics, that the central part which is the market has one half which is "permanent", the housing surrounding is also "permanent".
But half the market are for "temporary" events or rebuilds or such.

Let me know if you (or anyone else for that matter =) want a tour of the current ideas/concepts shown in Lux and how they can be used for RP, immersion, events and other such things. I think that 4B would also be glad to do a similar thing in Island of Wonders.

Happy hunting

Spoon mayor of Lux Sanctuary.​

 

Highly subjective. Problem with the engineer vs artist is that the engineer deals with what works. The artist's view varies from person to person so there really isn't much an argument there.

Stop right there. How does a holdfast have the same feel as a metropolis. To suggest any towns of different sizes are going to have the same feel is just wrong and contrary to what you're suggesting about unused space.. since larger towns will obviously be using more space. You're also not taking into account how that space is used or where in the scene it is.

 

@Kvow
@Bowen Bloodgood

One of the issues is that all towns sharing a template also have the same entry point.
If we look on Solania and Kingsport then the big thing that changes the essence of those towns are the entry points. Everyone knows the curve of the Kingsport beach after a while, likewise with the gate of Solania.

So even IF there are problems/limits on how to solve dynamic placement of the borders/entry. Then if we could at least get a prefab of X nr of entry points selectable before. Then there would be some much more instant feel of variance since smaller towns could build the whole thing clustered around such an entry point instead of sharing the same ones which will be used by the metropolises.

Looking at the basic PaxLair template I can see maybe 8 'natural' entry points with some of those closer to a center which would be more of a good choice for the small , while others could be closer to the edges which would be more of a good choice for the larger towns.

 

You're wrong. This is not a seamless world, and the comparison is irrelevant. It's not my only grievance; not sure why the quantity of my POT grievances is relevant. All POT zones except POTs that are metroplis, are too large for the space occupied within. It matters because every other zone in the game does NOT have this characteristic. And having this 'feature' exclusively for POTs feels out of place. That said, I think there are a handful of things that could be done to improve this 'feature' if the void must persist. (1) varying grading in the landscape, (2) vegetation, (3) player ability to place end-of-zone barriers, (4) things to do/see in the empty space, wandering travelers, (5) town barricades/fences.

 

For the sake of a mental exercise let's roll with your seamless world comment. If SotA was a developed as a seamless world, POT tiers (town, city, metropolis) would almost certainly be based on the size of the land. Why? Because in the majority of the actual world you purchase land in terms of square meters, and not in terms of square meters of occupied space.

Housing lots share this characteristic. Instead of everyone getting the same sized land, and being restricted to square meters of occupied space, you purchase the land in varying sizes. This is much better. Can you imagine a world everyone who owns a row house gets a Castle sized lot? It would be horrible.

Any given housing lot cannot be upgraded to a larger size without impacting his/her potential neighbors. So their options are to ask his neighbors to move, or find a new plot of land for his dream home.

POTs can be viewed in the same light, just at a larger scale. As far as I'm concerned POTs should follow the same paradigm. Further, the description of POTs on the purchase page implies POTs are sized according to land size, and not occupation size.

 

Maybe you feel it is out of place but I don't. I love the fact that my little forested crossroads village will be just a piece of a larger scene. A metropolis should fill out the scene while the smaller towns will actually feel small... and also have the potential to grow if the owner so wants. POT should feel like the size they are. By putting a hamlet into a larger scene it will feel like a little hamlet... not like a town with artificial boundary walls around it. I want you to have to walk through the woods to make it to my little town. Shrinking the size is just for those that don't like the walk and want the convenience of everything next to an exit.

Trying to compare lot size to town size is just not a fair comparison. A row house does not have the option to grow... it's always going to be nestled between two other row houses... but a town can grow. I love the idea of this dynamic... it actually makes if feel like a real town. Even the complaint of allow lots to be removed or moved around as being unrealistic... well, it is realistic... I watch huge areas of single family home get bought up, rezoned, and new townhouse or condo's built instead. Happens all the time.

So if you don't like dynamic towns, don't go in. Stick to the NPC towns.... no one is forcing you in.

Also, I believe it was in the marathon hangout Darkstarr mentioned they are reconsidering some having some resources in towns... but the bigger the town the less resources... this gives a smaller town the niche of being able to provide resources while a larger one does the crafting and it's all based on the amount of unused land. Cool concept in my book.

 

A small note if they go the inhabited route vs animals in the scene is that a small holdfast in a huge scene might see a lot of hunting opportunities in the wild reaches of their scene.

 

And I remember listening something about resource nodes as 'compensation' for the metro buffs and npc buildings.

 

I'm glad it fits your style. It doesn't fit mine. At least one of us gets what they want.

There are many ways to make a town feel small. You mentioned a few, and left out the obvious one: a small zone. There a plenty of example zones in SotA that I could point to to illustrate this.

Shrinking the zone is not just for those that what the convenience of an exit. It doesn't fit the theme of any other zone in the game. It's unique to POTs, and it doesn't belong. And, of course I would word this differently: Growing a zone to a larger size is just to accommodate players who want to upgrade. And, let's be real, it's easier for the dev team to handle it this way because it reduces the amount of commitment, while maximizing potential return.

Thanks. By the same token, if you don't like zones that properly fit the occupation (as is the case with every NPC town), then don't go in. I will continue to advocate for changes I want, until the time development switches to maintenance mode.

It's not always going to be nestled between two other row houses if you apply the same land usage philosophy that POTs have. It would certainly have the option to grow. If you'd like replace my usage of row house with village house/lot. Castle lots owned by all who have village houses. Horrible. As I said it was a mental exercise, and you're welcome to disagree, and you likely did because it fits your goals.

This is cool, but it doesn't address my concerns unless it's intended to be a distraction. So while I'm glad this is being considered, it doesn't do quite enough to pacify me.

 

So here are my thoughts about being able to tear down towns.

I'd like to make a distinction between Pre-Release and Release:

1. Pre-Release - A huge benefit to a PoT owner is to be able to experiment with the layout of the town. Not everyone has done a clay model (waves at Blake) See what works, what doesn't and try a bit of variety. Why not? Testing is a good thing. There are wipes anyway, so an extra town wipe here and there prior to launch would hopefully not be a big deal for most residents. I currently have no residents so no one would be affected anyway...lol.

2. Release - After residents have settled in, tearing down an entire town could cause problems. But that is between the Mayor/Governor/Owner and the residents of each town. Not my business how another governor does things, not my concern at all. Not because I am blase or apathetic, but because I have my own towns to govern and I have no say in what others do *to* or *for* their residents.

Being able to relocate lots after launch will be a good thing, especially if a resident wants to move to a larger lot. Redesigning the placement of decorations is a good thing if you decide to put in a town circle instead of a town square. Those are just a couple of examples. Add to that the ability to grow your town, meaning, add more lot capacity is all a good thing.

In life, villages, towns, cities actually do redevelop areas. I live in Chicago and we have two seasons - construction and everything else...lol. So perhaps the governor of PoT *your name here* works with the residents to determine what area to redevelop. Who is to say that governors WON'T give residents a voice in town management?

---> On the whole, there are so many good things with having a Dynamic PoT, whether it's now or after launch, that I no longer care about having something static and written in stone. If I can get a few terrain optimizations great. If I not, that's great too. I am not wedded to the idea that I must have time with the devs, rather, I am now cemented to the joy of dynamic placement.

Variety is the spice of life!! Wahoo!!

 

Here's the problem I have with the comparison you're making. No matter the size of the scene.. a row lot takes up a specific percentage of that scene. On the other hand.. a town of any size always takes up the exact same amount of space on the world map. Some don't even do that. You're taking the artist's perspective and trying to argue an engineer's argument and it's all based on your personal perception.

The reason it would be horrible for row houses to take up a castle lot space is largely a mechanical issue unless you were talking about a densely populated area. It takes up space that could otherwise go to other players. Player towns do not suffer from this limitation. A small house in the middle of the woods can look perfectly in place and take up as much land as you like and no one should care as it doesn't effect anyone's options or gameplay in any way. Especially since player towns are entirely optional.

It doesn't hurt the game, the story or the players. What you're talking about is purely a perception issue you create for yourself. If there were a significant technical reason to change the scene size I would agree.. but there isn't.

 

... actually we both do... don't enter a POT... you'll never notice the things you don't like.

... so even though you can ignore POT's you'd rather see other players enjoyment ruined.

Yup. The direction they've been moving POT's has been great in my opinion and has only gotten better... actually more than I could hope for when they first announced them. Sorry it's making the game worse for you but luckily you can ignore them while others can enjoy them. win/win Hopefully they'll even give you the option to completely turn them off, I know people have been requesting that.

 

The notion that I opt out of visiting my own POT is quite remarkable.

 

Don't agree, but there is no sense beating a dead horse.

 

I agree with much of what you are saying in this thread. I have no idea how hard it will be for Port to alter map sizes. I love your ideas:
" (1) varying grading in the landscape, (2) vegetation, (3) player ability to place end-of-zone barriers, (4) things to do/see in the empty space, wandering travelers, (5) town barricades/fences."

I can deal with things as they are but can see lots of room for improvement. I would like to be able to get add on store and be able to earn in game "lots" that cant be used for houses. Just for building decorative parks and gardens. No function other than to look nice and help differentiate between POTs.

 

They'd basically have to build new templates for every town size. So if one town size has say.. 5 templates.. all town sizes would need 5 templates each. 7 town sizes so that's 35 different scenes they'd have to build and test. I've no idea how easy it is for them to swap biomes. I'm assuming at least some of that is automated by now. I'm pretty sure Unity doesn't have a means to simply enlarge or cut an existing terrain mesh. I could be wrong about that. Either way it's a lot more work than how they have it set up now.

 

Thanks for telling me - way above my pay grade. I'm all for making sacrifices to help them finish the game. Hopefully some day if we have success they will be able to give us more options. In the mean time im so impressed with what the players are coming up with. The kindly decorator that has helped us so much lately keeps blowing my mind at Vanguard. It keeps changing and it is a great places for folks to see dynamic in action. Honestly, im so grateful to this individual that i helped bump him up to Edelmann. Let me post a few pictures here but keep dropping by every few days as it changes often. For a nice small POT go see Drakenhof



Nice table, im waiting for my liege-lord to arrive. If Jatvardur was attending also he would take my seat and i would be at his right.



I like the variations of the walls, hoping someday Port will have different levels of ivy grow on theses walls to help with unique looks.


ooops



I love the night in Vanguard.



German style beer hall, it can be argued that the Queen of England is the zenith of high culture, but there is no doubt that Germans own beer culture.

 

@mbomber - "I win"...ROFL!!!!!!

That has to be one of the BEST pics I've seen. Saved it too.