#Respawn vs Finite resources

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

unborn hill
#

They're thinking about having smaller map so they can use more advanced procedural terrain techniques (I can't recall the correct wording), so I would imagine if they have smaller maps they would implement respawning resources, which could be interesting for when players decide to build bases. Players will probably build bases around a large resource node so they can control it and have a larger say over the economic flow of the resource, much like how countries "release" barrels of oil.

If resources are finite then I would imagine permanent settlements will be rarer that focus on exploiting resources, or at the very least the resource node would need to be much larger, or more temporary towns will be built until the resource is finished and then the town will be abandoned (making the ruin mechanic worthwhile) so they can move on and find a new node. This would make it more difficult for more advanced settlements for mining (as an example) to come to fruition since they would constantly be moving or it would be a large joint effort for a squad to settle near the node and then transport it back to the main settlement where the smelters and smithies are more advanced.

Though if the resources are finite it would not allow them to use the more advanced procedural terrain weathering and stuff like that.

zenith mountain
#

They mention ruins and hexite a lot, would rare items found inside these ruins respawn?
I definitely think that fish, trees, rocks and such should respawn, if they do how fast would they respawn?
Would the same things respawn in the same spot or would possibly different things spawn there?

#

What if resources slowly depleted in a certain area and needed time to respawn if they become fully depleted
so it would be better to regulate the resources instead of harvesting them to depletion

unborn hill