Eco Dev Tracker

Eco is in Early Access on Steam since February 2018, before it was only available in Alpha to buyers on our website and before that as an even earlier version only for buyers on kickstarter.

I think that Eco is in a very playable state, it definitely misses some more endgame content, though. In regards to bugs I can't really agree with you, there is a lot of them left and there is still some major things that need to be tackled, like the ominous performance and "why is my stuff invisible" issues that do not appear for everyone, can barely be safely reproduced (especially for the last one, which no dev can reproduce at all) or need a lot of time to be fixed as basically everything needs to be reworked over time (performance issues, or what people call 'the memory leak')

Hence in total I think it's right where it currently is.

And while that is, we can implement more of what we want to see in Eco from our Eco Tree, though the Eco Tree is not meant as a roadmap...

Saves are stored on the local PC they were started on, given they are just servers. They can get a very big size and a lots of automatic backups are created as well, so Steam Cloud won't work for them.

Well, what you did there was never intended, hence also not supported. :D

Configs are made in .json, which prevents us from doing any comments that wouldn't totally break the config styling. You can always help to add the variables to the Wiki, though ;)

The server GUI is still available and working, so I'm not sure what you mean.

Do you mean for Linux? It was never implemented for Linux, if it worked I have no idea why. So, that would be a no.

Keep in mind the docker containers are provided as-is and do not receive any support by us, though.

Trains are a planned feature, but one that will likely not be worked on during EA.

We do not recommend at all to increase size beyond our recommended values, that at current player amounts on servers end at 2.56 km² for servers with 100 people online at the same time, anything beyond that size will always be unnecessary waste of space and influence ecology in a way player impact is no longer existent - e.g., not Eco as intended, especially when big world sizes are coupled with few players. (Basically default size is for coop, 1km² for the average public server and the biggest public servers that have ever existed can go up to 2.56 km² for best experience, depending on their player online counts)

Having a thousand people, a fourth of it active with 60-100 players online at the same time is zero issue for a 2.56km² world.

Worlds up to 4km² are supported nontheless, anything beyond that does not receive support from us and may break at any time. Worlds beyond 16km², depending on height, may not even be able to be created, due to integer limit.

...

As other players have already explained quite well, Eco was never and is not intended to be played in Singleplayer, but in a (random / public) multiplayer environment. We do offer configuration options for singleplayer (and multiplayer) worlds that allow you to change resource costs / crafting time / skill gain and pretty much everything to something you like more, our defaults are just what works for an average eco player (and those are generally more tolerable to grind), but there is no way to have a default ready for every potential playstyle and personal preference.

In any case, it's absolutely not impossible, including without mods and on our low collaboration preset to beat the game. Many people do that and yes it does have some grind and will always be a totally different gameplay than on multiplayer.

I've got good news at least in regards to creative mode, as that is planned. We also won't leave EA this year, as the last two years were a heavy ride for us, b...