Questions for the Week 6/13 through 6/19

[Trenchfoot]

• I want an FFA/FL open world where the players are given the tools to alter the world, and then set loose.
• I want structures to be as safe as it gets.
• I want siege mechanics to be one of, if not 'the' most difficult thing to achieve in the entire game. ie. The method by which you get past structures.
• I want the ability to make peace (through war if necessary).
• I want my enemies to be formidable (not pushovers).
• I want my achievements to have a linear purpose (if conquering a resource is only valuable as a means to conquer more resources, this is circular to me, and therefore meaningless to pursue).
• I want a predominantly zone free world (no amusement parks).
• I want the world to be able to change (areas become safe/unsafe through alliances/war dynamically, as the players carve out the world).
• I want communities to be able to enter into a state of victory with the opportunity, through hard work, to retain that state (victory being defined as: made safe by our own hands, for our people to enjoy).

My questions:

Which of these do you fully intend to remove?

What 'idea' (if any) will it be replaced with if you do remove it?

Which of these will definitely remain on the table for alteration?

[inhabit]

Why are you reluctant to implement totem decay now, is it simply not ready or another issue/concern? The game needs this sooner.
Paintbrush and a bit of varnish once a month j/k