devtrackers.gg
Would you mind linking to this on the wiki? I can't find it, and am curious what the settings should be for about a dozen players.
https://wiki.play.eco/en/Server_Configuration#Change_World_Size
12 players is still coop, so default size.
Would you mind linking to this on the wiki? I can't find it, and am curious what the settings should be for about a dozen players.
https://wiki.play.eco/en/Server_Configuration#Change_World_Size
12 players is still coop, so default size.
pollution is already a core challenge with real consequences
Ehhh not really. I think it needs to be dialed way up. I know people who have hundreds of hours in the game, myself included, who can count the number of times the sea level has risen on one hand, for example.
And how often did you play on a server with a world size that supported the player count and that did nothing against the problem? E.g. comparable to the official servers, not going beyond 1km² if there isn't at least more than hundred people, staying on 0.52 km² if its notable less than 50?
Also, it's kinda not the goal of Eco to have the world flood - data for official servers suggests the occurance is of a frequency as we expect it. We are not however responsible for the configuration of other servers - it's understandable and fully fine if those value other needs higher, but it has never been a secret or unknown that the world capacity needs to fit for pollution to pose any threat.
Read moreI agree that all mechanisms are in place, but it doesn't feel that way when playing the game. I have spent over 1k hours playing Eco (bought this game in December 2023) and have found that pollution is just a thing that happens on the side IF someone is polluting deliberately.
To expand, what I mean by "Yes! – Make pollution a core challenge with real consequences." is that you would have to put in a SIGNIFICANT amount of effort to have no effect on the environment as the game goes on. At the moment, you don't need to do anything because in order to cause any serious harm to the planet someone has to deliberately pollute and overproduce. And even if such player exists, they get banned for doing so disregarding that this IS the 'core challenge' of the game.
I may be playing on the wrong servers or bought the game at the wrong time (when pollution was nerfed) but that's my experience. What's hard to quantify in Eco is because based on the server peop...
That's exactly what I was saying - you are likely playing a server that isn't using fitting configuration for their player count. We've been constantly repeating and it's noted on the wiki that the ecologic part of Eco only works when the capacity of the world for handling pollution is in balance with the player count, e.g. mostly the server having chosen a fitting world size for the audience.
That unfortunately is not the case for many servers, as many communities value a higher space higher and opt for large servers despite lower player numbers. When the world size is selected fittingly for the player count pollution absolutely does play a role without anyone needing to pollute on purpose. That is well visible on many of the official server cycles, multiple per year ending in a flooded world. White Tiger requires laws to restrict pollution levels, otherwise it would drown just as well - it's a constant heated topic there, as the measures that tend to be taken are restrict...
Read moreThe question is a bit odd as it seems to be missing context, as pollution is already a core challenge with real consequences and can be handled with systems like courts and laws when servers use the correct settings for their player amount, which barely any do.
I nontheless voted "Yes! - Make pollution a core challenge with real consequences." as the next minor Update happens to contain changes to those mechanics making them harder and trying to automatically adjust some things when servers were not configured correctly for the player count.
You need to set EnableAdminUI in Civics.eco and then open the Federation and untick the "Requires child settlements" checkbox. /nosetreqs doesn't apply there.
If you manage to find the Jingo discord, I've been screenshotting everyone's build every season for the 17 we've been running (assuming it's more than a box!). There's some real gems in there.
Edit: I'm not sure if discord links are allowed, since someone avoided posting a link and someone else just went for it, but here it is: https://discord.gg/DCsGb4zETx
That's no problem, only thing that is not acceptable is server ads as posts or server ads in comments when the OP wasn't actually looking for servers in their post.
Read more"getting settlements into a state that actively rewards collaboration with other towns towards the greater goal" - I would add that you have to make people want to/incentivize work towards this greater goal. Nobody cares about the fake meteor or the eco-system if it doesn't affect them directly, just like in real life. So why make Eco like real life? People often play video games to escape reality and experience something new. How about a different goal?
I personally bought this game because I wanted to play as a bad actor and force the water levels to rise and cause mayhem. I may not be the typical player but from my experience many people thought the same. We can be the counterweight that adds to the difficulty of the game, perhaps extending the time required to finish a round. So give us the tools to do that, therefore towns and countries will be incentivized to do something about it.
The treatment I get every time I bring this up as a goal in a server is "You're...
I'm not sure if you actually read my post, as what I have been saying is that there is already sufficient difficulty (as in too much) - there is no need for an increase in it in the social matters.
The other part of your post seems to be a very generalized premise I cannot agree with, neither does noone in real life care nor do people in Eco not care. In the opposite the successful shooting of the meteor is the main and unfortunately often only goal the majority of players pursues and failure in preserving the world regularly leads to mass exodus of people from a server that feel they have lost when sea level rises and poses inconvenience to them.
Eco is also intentionally a game abstracting from real life and supposed to allow reflection back on that. That will always be limited in effectiveness, as in opposite to a game you just cannot leave in the real world.
If players already have issues organizing despite that having major benefits in the important soc...
Read morePost has been priorly approved, no reports for Server Ads necessary.
Let's hope exhaustion works properly soon
We're not aware of any issues with it - it's being successfully used on servers like MightyMoose as well.
I would prefer being able to view this information with the initial spawn map open. You used to be able to use chat on that screen to both ask the players about what the server needs, and type out skills/objects you could mouse-over. From this I could figure out sky about what is needed and plan an ideal spot in the world for whatever plan or build I'm going for. They nerfed it entirely though.
A redesign of the join card for settlements on the spawn ui is actually planned and would contain the professions of citizens there. A global overview could be added to the top of the map. We have no plans for an overview in the server list itself currently, though - I think that would both be too verbose for that place and have a deterring psychological effect that we don't necessarily want to support, given the choice for a server shouldn't be based solely on the professions already taken there. (And for any more populated server that makes zero sense at all, as all professions will be taken a dozen times) I could rather imagine a intelligent display of only such professions that are currently in specific need, in the form of a "Lacks: Nuclear Scientist".
Make sure to update to 11.1.4, the issues were fixed there.
Generally, the game is played in a too fast manner for what is intended, yes. I also personally agree with most of your points, but there is differences to be made in what mods are used. There is mods that just outright make the game easier / quicker to finish, such that alleviate grind for people that aren't a fan of that (which is understandable, especially if your time is limited), some that introduce QoL features (both for things where we want to do that as well and for things where we purposefully want things to not be easy until later game like terraforming) and such that are decisions that are helpful to follow a specific concept and set an atmosphere, like global currencies. But there is also tons of mods that in the opposite make the game harder and less quick to finish.
Though, town competition can quickly lead to a more hostile atmosphere and is something that can be very detrimental to gameplay depending on what kind of experience you want to have. It's a consta...
Read moreThis happens when no RemoteAddress is set, there is a pin in the discord for that:
I believe void storage is accessible via the icon on the screen to the bottom right? For anyone unsure.
Correct, the swirly Strange Loop icon in the bottom right to the left of the minimap UI part.
The storages were likely configured to accept more than they do by default, which was lost when you didn't copy configs and mods over - the game will then move everything that was stored and is now no longer supported to be stored into the void storage of the respective owners.
Long way to say “low priority”
Actually not - if something has priority, it is actually planned.
Suggestions aren't planned until they specifically get planned.
If you are playing alone with no cooperation settings, is there still a maximum profession limit?
No, profession limits by default only apply on higher collaboration levels.
I really wish they'd not just focus on the big servers. A lot of the changes are great if there are a ton of players. But once seasons die down, the workload grows to lategame and picking up abandoned jobs is harder. For sure frustrating
We are looking into mechanics that would allow us to do things like "dynamic professions" where based on the collab level of the server professions get merged or look different instead of basing it on star counts. Unfortunately with the vast options for customization and the intent of Eco to be a collaborative game best played on bigger public servers that isn't as easily done as said.
Read moreI don't really mind the interconnectivity between professions to be honest. I like cooperating, sailing/driving around the globe for things I need and thus using the market as it is.
But I feel like main issue for casual players is the extreme fast pace of the game and all the pressures that come with that pace. The amount of people playing 8 hours per day on average on servers are the core group the devs seem to be looking at the most. And I think thats OK, as long as there are good long term alternatives (with exhaustion, I like that feature) with more differentiated and longer endgame goals.
If a server has more differentiated and longer goals, people can also wait a bit longer and/or play more casual, because it doesn't have to finished all within 30 days.
And yes, I know a server admin can change the meteor to any other amount of days, but the game doesn't seem to balanced at all for that at when it comes to profession progression and the singular focu...
That is also what we think, Eco is very often played at a pace much too fast - which it was never intended for. We hope the module rework will already help with slowing the tech progression race for efficiency down until we can implement a more effective solution like global research eras.
I'm pretty sure it was U10. Currently, if you remove any plant from a plot (as in a claimable plot, all plants use those to determine nutrients/overcrowding), those plants will never grow back. It doesn't matter what sort of plant it is, and unaware players will often gather raw crops completely from a location and they never return. Trees don't use this system though, and there are exceptions such as the types of moss.
Previously, plants would grow back even if you completely wiped out all plants from a biome, and I assume this change was made so that players would soon have to rely upon farmers instead of charring crops in their hundreds during the early tiers.
Being able to control what grow where naturally though has it's advantages, like this: https://imgur.com/a/eStA6Wu
The prior mechanism simply led to players not actually farming, but just going by with low level food collected by themselves. The taken solution was an overshoot and will be adjusted with the changes coming for animals actually eating plants (so they are gone) and the pollution rework based around that. We also intend to squash the calorie numbers, e.g. making you need to eat much less often, as items provide more calorie density.
