Top Floor Shop Houses

[王 rando 王]

1 minute ago, Mitch (IFRIT) said:

The issue that is currently being discussed is the hit to server performance. For the sake of explaining it here easily. It can be amounted to essentially doubling the amount of houses that need to be loaded by the server. It's unknown the performance hit it would take to do so. And it would be infuriating for many to buy the house and then have to loose it. And for those at max house cap, they had to sell one of their other houses to make room, and are now out the new house and their old house. IDK if there is a reliable way to test this in a test environment as it's pretty hard to replicate a full server, and all the loads and stresses that come along with it. 

set up a public test server in which everyone has unlimited money, do multiple server messages on the main server telling people to join it, people who join it get a free 25k and a sneak peak at possible new houses. we'll have a decent amount of players on it easily.

[Mitch (IFRIT)]

2 minutes ago, 王 rando 王 said:

set up a public test server in which everyone has unlimited money, do multiple server messages on the main server telling people to join it, people who join it get a free 25k and a sneak peak at possible new houses. we'll have a decent amount of players on it easily.

yes that is an option. But more what's the max stress etc. I am picturing a full server with all the houses owned with all full inventories being accessed in different ways at different times. Essentially an environment that can really only be obtained on a live server that isn't being done just for testing. More to come on that 

 

[Kawaii]

4 minutes ago, Mitch (IFRIT) said:

The issue that is currently being discussed is the hit to server performance. For the sake of explaining it here easily. It can be amounted to essentially doubling the amount of houses that need to be loaded by the server. It's unknown the performance hit it would take to do so. And it would be infuriating for many to buy the house and then have to loose it. And for those at max house cap, they had to sell one of their other houses to make room, and are now out the new house and their old house. IDK if there is a reliable way to test this in a test environment as it's pretty hard to replicate a full server, and all the loads and stresses that come along with it. 

More realistically I was thinking to just make it clear that buying one of these houses would be a risk since it could be rugpulled at any time. People should understand that it is an experiment and they can't complain if they lose out IMO. Also, maybe only make it so these houses are available in city limit areas/surrounding areas? Most complaints from players are about the lack of housing in the cities. Don't need to be able to buy stores in turfs/rural areas/out of the way places. Hopefully that would help limit the added stress to performance?

[王 rando 王]

Just now, Mitch (IFRIT) said:

yes that is an option. But more what's the max stress etc. I am picturing a full server with all the houses owned with all full inventories being accessed in different ways at different times. Essentially an environment that can really only be obtained on a live server that isn't being done just for testing. More to come on that 

 

offer a bunch of money then for people to join, the more money as a reward the more people would join, plus alot of people want these houses already.

[Kawaii]

To add on, it could start with a limited run of shops available and then add on incrementally to see how the server does perhaps

[王 rando 王]

Just now, 王 rando 王 said:

offer a bunch of money then for people to join, the more money as a reward the more people would join, plus alot of people want these houses already.

oh wait could you put it on the live server, make the houses free for testing only, and dont make it count towards anyones house slots

or save a copy of the server as is, get rid of the house limit, make those new houses free, and then everyone would be buying these houses and using them, and then after your testing is finished just revert the progress of the server to before the test took place

[Mitch (IFRIT)]

2 minutes ago, Kawaii said:

To add on, it could start with a limited run of shops available and then add on incrementally to see how the server does perhaps

that sounds like an easy solution to me too. But for any house we don't want "owned" it has to be done individually with each house. NPC shops is already going to be a nightmare for the devs to sift through im sure. I can't imagine the rest of the map.. 

[王 rando 王]

5 minutes ago, Mitch (IFRIT) said:

that sounds like an easy solution to me too. But for any house we don't want "owned" it has to be done individually with each house. NPC shops is already going to be a nightmare for the devs to sift through im sure. I can't imagine the rest of the map.. 

i like my idea above more lol

[Kawaii]

11 minutes ago, Mitch (IFRIT) said:

that sounds like an easy solution to me too. But for any house we don't want "owned" it has to be done individually with each house. NPC shops is already going to be a nightmare for the devs to sift through im sure. I can't imagine the rest of the map.. 

Could it be easier in thought to do it the opposite and have the devs make individual shops owned? It would be a bit tedious but if it were limited to cities and expanded from there I think it could be nice. Seeing as it's just relatively crappy city houses that are hard to defend and wouldn't have more than 2 crates of storage, I dont see there being a huge rush of people selling their main properties to have a shop front place. 

[王 rando 王]

Just put it on the live server for testing and then revert the server to before so nobody loses anything and you get an accurate full server test

i mean this has the be the simplest way right?

[Sheriff Rick]

1 hour ago, Mitch (IFRIT) said:

The issue that is currently being discussed is the hit to server performance. For the sake of explaining it here easily. It can be amounted to essentially doubling the amount of houses that need to be loaded by the server. It's unknown the performance hit it would take to do so. And it would be infuriating for many to buy the house and then have to loose it. And for those at max house cap, they had to sell one of their other houses to make room, and are now out the new house and their old house. IDK if there is a reliable way to test this in a test environment as it's pretty hard to replicate a full server, and all the loads and stresses that come along with it. 

Maybe a slow rollout of making one or two new house variants available and seeing the impact on performance?  There could be a two week or month testing period where it is understood that buying these houses may be reverted and you will be doing so at your own risk? 

[王 Caden The Fed 王]

19 hours ago, Patato said:

Then how about you stick to the suggesting and we will tell you whats possible. instead of essentially calling us brainless idiots

wait are you implying you're not a brainless idiot??

genuinely confused looking for an answer

[abdul karim azeem]

19 hours ago, 王 rando 王 said:

 

I could see making these Slum Houses into 1 craters which there is some of these out in the middle of no where.

 

i feel like there is a LOT of these shanty huts all over the map and especially in locations that would be very useful, loads near meth lab, gathering places, rebels etc. would be cool to see them purchasable but I dont think they should be a 1c, maybe it could be a new type of housing that is essentially just a "spawn house" with very limited storage at like 100 v and p?
also can these be destroyed? never really seen one go down?

 

also with regards to the shop buildings good idea, surely cant be that hard to god mode all the important ones in the cities, there is only like 2/3 per main city. and surely just make these unpurchasable.
ALTERNATIVELY make them purchasable but when the building would be "destroyed" it is ghost destroyed where the building still stands but it is no longer usable, doors are unlocked inventory cant be used and cannot be spawned at?

[王 rando 王]

9 minutes ago, abdul karim azeem said:

 

i feel like there is a LOT of these shanty huts all over the map and especially in locations that would be very useful, loads near meth lab, gathering places, rebels etc. would be cool to see them purchasable but I dont think they should be a 1c, maybe it could be a new type of housing that is essentially just a "spawn house" with very limited storage at like 100 v and p?
also can these be destroyed? never really seen one go down?

 

also with regards to the shop buildings good idea, surely cant be that hard to god mode all the important ones in the cities, there is only like 2/3 per main city. and surely just make these unpurchasable.
ALTERNATIVELY make them purchasable but when the building would be "destroyed" it is ghost destroyed where the building still stands but it is no longer usable, doors are unlocked inventory cant be used and cannot be spawned at?

Good ideas, and some of those metal shacks are actually like bigger than house addons, there’s different ones so it depends. But for the really small ones it can be the same as a garage storage, I think garage storage is less than 1c

 

and honestly I don’t see why the shop houses near square would need to be godmoded, if you implement this and it gets blown up the shop will still be useable. And most likely the person who owns the house on top of it will just request medic repair so it won’t even be blown up that long.

[abdul karim azeem]

14 minutes ago, 王 rando 王 said:

Good ideas, and some of those metal shacks are actually like bigger than house addons, there’s different ones so it depends. But for the really small ones it can be the same as a garage storage, I think garage storage is less than 1c

 

and honestly I don’t see why the shop houses near square would need to be godmoded, if you implement this and it gets blown up the shop will still be useable. And most likely the person who owns the house on top of it will just request medic repair so it won’t even be blown up that long.

 

I think its for visibility especially for new players. when these houses are broken they are extremely glitchy along with armas weird game physics i find myself getting caught at every dip and floating. It looks a bit shit when a new player spawns in a city and wants to go check out the stores to get a grip and the store is broken and the npc is stood in rubble half in the ground.

do think it would be easier to god mode the building and not make it purchasable, although living above a gunstore sounds cool i think the practicality of it isnt there.

[王 rando 王]

40 minutes ago, abdul karim azeem said:

 

I think its for visibility especially for new players. when these houses are broken they are extremely glitchy along with armas weird game physics i find myself getting caught at every dip and floating. It looks a bit shit when a new player spawns in a city and wants to go check out the stores to get a grip and the store is broken and the npc is stood in rubble half in the ground.

do think it would be easier to god mode the building and not make it purchasable, although living above a gunstore sounds cool i think the practicality of it isnt there.

Gunstore already isn’t godmoded, only the ones within like a 50 meter radius of square is godmoded. And I don’t think it would be that big of a problem, the people that would own those square houses would be the bigger kavala gangs because they have the most money. And all those gangs are allied so they will rarely be blown up, especially if it’s someone house who has limitless money, they would just pay a medic to repair it instantly when it gets blown up

Allowing those to be owned by civs kinda ensures they wouldn’t be blown up all the time since you wouldn’t just let someone 50 your house does in front of you. And if it is blown up you would just buy medic house repair.

[Vortex]

If housing is becoming that big of a concern maybe bringing something back similar to the old donor town with the few roads of houses?

remember the added houses used to be real buggy though

 

[王 rando 王]

4 hours ago, Vortex said:

If housing is becoming that big of a concern maybe bringing something back similar to the old donor town with the few roads of houses?

remember the added houses used to be real buggy though

 

I never liked donor town, I’d much rather asylum utilize the unused houses and structures on the vanilla map, especially if Mitch says this method alone would be essentially doubling the amount of houses. 

[ObiWoki]

We will look into these new houses as a solution for the housing shortage,

Thanks for your suggestion