Owning Property in EverQuest Next

because your phasing out and making it where only certain things can be.. THIS IS A SANDBOX game.. I cannot stress how many times I have to say it. There won't be big plots and big important characters. This game also will not have quests like in other games, NORE will it have levels. This game will be a lot different, players will be making the stories. Use Eve as an example.

So...once someone 'owns' some land nobody else can harvest on that land...so that would give that player/group/guild some prized land to use to potentially make things and impact a server's economy? Probably not since that takes a lot of thinking by the dev team to come up with a way to let players work in an economy driven by players.

It is possibly a good thing but it would be even more interesting if other players could attempt to take over at least some of the 'claimed' land. Maybe a city sized chunk and a small amount of surrounding land is player owned with upkeep and no concern with someone taking it over...but other vast stretches of land (with resources) could be contested by other players. Oh no...the horrible "PVP" world in a "PVE" game...shudder.

So, a player can potentially claim a forest (???) and then none of that wood is available to anyone else? Sounds like a great idea....

Upkeep? Sure that seems like a logical idea...and if the player can pay for it by renting rights to harvest on his land on a monthly basis that is great..maybe someone can even pay for an account with Kronos if enough people pay for the right to harvest.

Now..this "populated with advanced procedural AI with lore and story-driven progression." greatly concerns me....

Isn't this game suppose to be a sandbox? Why would an AI need to be involved with lore and story-driven progression? The game is now a themepark?

Oh..right..it is a "hybrid" themepark/sandbox...where the "sandbox" part is simply digging holes?

Sure seems like the hype is not going to live up to the end product....

This is the first time I've agreed to more than one bullet point on restricting the everquest gameplay. Both only approved/upvoted structures should be allowed in the open world, and only in designated "city" regions, especially if it's inconvenient. I would be happy with just a guild house.

ohkay - well EQN claiming to be sandbox means you should claim "where you want to" - but i remember uo very well, with certain less social beeings dropping their "claims" on to certain well visited places so they could have them "in private" and everyone else had to look for a new spot. So to avoid Issues with "oh here is the Gnolls atm and i do want to be first to kill a billion so i will claim the area where most fights will occur" we should go for areas that are agreed as housing area.
Alternatives could be a pricing system. Like "close to the Spire / Druid Portal" costs double the fee.
"Agreed on" thus would feel lifelike - want to build in the mohave? put up with the distance and materials needed...in place...a Guarded area System might be interesting as well - you want to build on a gnoll cave? do so but mercs to protect your home will cost a lot .. no the guard will not work here, they are for the local towns..

Really wish I could speak to SOE developers in person and bounce ideas off them while receiving feedback. Would be great to know if the ideas expressed are feasible or just not possible with current assets.

The future of gaming is heading towards increased realism, and the sooner we get there, the better.

In EQN, if players want Landmark features, then the build should only be from SOE blueprints and the player has to gather the materials to build the house. This way a super big guild claim will require the whole guild to collect the resources and build the house, decorate it how you like. There may even be options to change colors of material like painted wood or the like.

But I say let's keep EQN more about the questing, leveling, raiding, and killing and have Landmark be the playgound it is.

I would like to see a mix between first and 2nd option, it should work like Landmark to a degree and building should get approved before going to EQN, my suggestion is have building build in EQN be invisable until it passes vote phase or have them be build in EQL but allow the ability to copy the exact terrain from EQN to EQL for the claim or somthing like that.
Also you should add Guild plots claims which is a scaled up version of normal claims bigger build part and much bigger boundry between them and high upkeep cost/maintanence so only larger guilds can get them because we dont realy want 10 man guild cities that are city size maybe small ones for towns for smaller guilds.

Being able to build both player and guild housing like in Landmark seems a 'no brainer' to me. Why wouldn't people want this, it would only add to the game immersion experience.

That is interesting, a cave, my premises was near a player house or something like that. and that's also why i said that this can go a long way lol.
and what do you mean by breaking open world pvp?

Okay, here's what i got in mind:
1. Based on the only approved or upvoted building only
- developers will categorized the approved 'templates' into several categories (for example type a, type b, and so on)
- templates will include not only a full building but things like furnitures, rooftop, doors, railings, walls, towers, or even a cave
- based on the place where you build, you can only put some types like, only type c and d on city A.
- players build based on those templates not voxels based, if they want to, they can go to landmark and submit their work to approval board. (not convenient, but you don't want something obscene placed in the city center)

2. Claiming and upkeep
- needed so that the claim won't be neglected and abandoned
- Lower claim price on desolated area
- low upkeep on desolated area, if this doesn't prevent abandoned claim, the upkeep can go up overtime if there is no building on it
- Higher claim price and upkeep on the better area
- this higher price come with compensation like better facilities such as guard, item dealers, teleporters and so on

3. Consequences
- you need time to build something, so it's not instant.
- The dynamic AI seems to be great, so might as well add more flag to it
- player property like buildings with no to little guards can be raided by the spawns who logically will want to take something from these humans
- the property risk being destroyed either by spawns or natural occurences like volcano for example.
- or it will attract some spawns to live in it or make a base on it, like a cave
- can it be destroyed by players? errmm, maybe... perhaps something like guild wars that involves the guild castle, but i don't think a general property should be destroy-able by players.

4. Limitation
- it's open world but you'll always need some limitation, an area where players can't built on.

Yup, i think this could lead player to make a logical decision like grouping together to make something like a small village which can later become a city (which means it won't break immersion)
This could also be expanded upon:
- when the claim group gather more claims, the surrounding area become an area where no claims can be placed upon (it grows bigger as the number of claim increases), if you want to claim it you need to enter the group.
- it has limits to how many claims it can house, if you want more claims to gather, it needs to be upgraded to the next stage which will add more facilities in return.
- at some point, the group will need to work together and build the accompanying facilities like inns, town hall, etc
- now the interesting part, when the group hit some point, it will start a rallying call
- fail that and say goodbye to your properties XD
- we need something significant to start a rallying call, as to prevent rallying calls happen all over the place

It can also be merged with what Talathion said on the first page. A mayor, village chief, factions, and civil war, huhu interesting

and many other things, because i think there are still some holes in my opinion. oh well, that's what the round table is all about right

I think there should be areas to claim that must fit the genre but not simply "cities". We should be able to build in the open world as part of the game but then again I'd hate to see claims littering the countryside. Would I love to build a cabin out in the wilds as a spot to craft and bank? yes, would I love to be able to create a defensive position for whatever reason, yes! Do I know how to implement that ability within the style and genre and without it causing more problems than it solves, no.

I voted designated areas. I don't trust other players to not ruin the game for me, whether it be the sense of adventure or plain logic. Outskirts of cities and towns seem like good places to build player owned buildings.

Had I not been playing Landmark, I may have voted to build anywhere. Right now I am playing Landmark, and the way that it is working out I do not think would be a good spread for EQN. The claims are all spread out from each other at an equal distance. This seems odd and there is a lack of wide open space where you do not see any buildings.

I would like to see more clusters of areas so I voted for what was mentioned as "city" building areas. I would also like to see stretches of land with no player interference. I only briefly played SWG but I saw there there that people naturally gravitated towards one each other in cities/towns and then there was plenty of open space. When I play Minecraft you see this pattern as well (unless there are server rule sets/mods).

I like option 2 of only approved structures with also making certain areas off limits. I remember in SWG people would put their cities down right on top of rare spawn areas and those creatures would almost never be seen again, which made the crafting materials from them even harder to acquire. I do like the idea of player made cities like SWG and give cities benefits based on player population, maybe even make it dynamic and have NPCs move into the area if enough players are living there. Even have the same idea that were presented in the original demo and maybe a goblin or orc horde come down on the city as they see it as a good place to loot from, or its infringing on their territory, maybe even attacks from a dragon or some sort. Keep things interesting and not just make it a place where houses are, this would help by requiring both crafters and raider types to live in the same areas. This way you could make raiders get crafting items from raid bosses and require crafting specialists to make the item, and the raiders would protect the homes of the crafters, but this is getting into another topic altogether.

Should only be allowed in city regions. I don't think it should be allowed for anything other than player housing and guild halls. I would actually prefer if it was like EQ where there are large instanced neighborhoods. That way you can still have an open area with other players or your guild but it doesn't have to impact the beauty/art of the open world. Let's face it, some player made stuff looks like trash and there's nothing you can really do to stop it unless every single thing is SOE approved, and I don't want that to be the process either.

Anywhere, anytime. But be advised...if you build it 'they' will come and by they I mean that wandering band of Insert random mob name here, nothing like the smell of burnt burled wood in the morning. Its an incentive to build closer to civilization without the restriction of having to. Instanced building zones are a joke, what is this 1995? You need to have your little home to decorate and show off to your 3 friends then forget about. Make it mean something, give the players the option...GIVE US BOTH!!

I thought there was a reason for SOE to make two separate games? I know EQN is suppose to be a sandbox, but I can see a lot of things going wrong and being less immersive if you let players build stuff in EQN. 99.9% of the structures in Landmark are an eye sore. I personaly don't want to see any player made structures in EQN. I can see if SOE made it so that the only houses that could be made were houses that SOE designed and you just gathered the material and when you had enough, the structure was built or something. Most people are not designers or artists. What will happen if you can't design worth a hill of beans? Are you expected to have to pay for a structure while people that can design don't?

I personally think that the best solution is to just have the current Landmark worlds link to EQN through the current portals, that way people can build whatever they want all over Landmark, but it doesn't affect EQN.

That's why landmark has the 'template' option. Players will be able to market a wall template for example. If you cant design worth a hill of beans or are just not into it you can buy a wall design or roof or whatever...whole building if that's your thing.

I just think that guilds or just groups of friends should be able to build in close proximity - it would be nice to see community-built towns or whatnot, not only single houses pooped randomly around the map

Don't get me wrong there are a lot of talented people in Landmark, but I have yet to see a level of detail on par with what should be in EQN other than that guy or girl that built that female statue. Granted they don't have access to the tools the devs have and if they did then maybe, but as of right now nothing other than that statue mentioned above is blowing me away. This is EQN we are talking about, not some 3rd graders art project.