Upkeep on buildings idea

OK I really believe spam building is the bane of this game that limits the scenery but also the feel and lags the game. How about remove the decay timer completely. Instead of this, upkeep costs are placed. The building will require building supplies in a chest that is attached to the structure and consume it. You can have a default of 1 hour but then it’ starts consuming every hour else it starts decaying (eating itself) until durability ends and it falls apart. You want that spam build of 1000 foundations across the entire island? OK but you gotta farm 5-8 hours a day every day to maintain it. One thing I know is spam builders are not farming types and it will get old quickly. Those that build more…modestly will be rewarded with time. Those that want grand castles, will need to maintain it. This setting could be adjusted so that servers can tailor it and you can even adjust it as default on officials depending on PVP, PVE or PVE-c settings.


Just use the rust upkeep, 10% per day. It will solve all spam problems.

It is not a problem for a normal base.

1 Like
  1. No
  2. There are a half dozen topics on this already.
  3. If you really just want to enjoy the scenery, you can play single player.

And the lag? Look I would prefer not to have a limit like this but since people can’t regulate themselves so that everyone can enjoy the game, something has to be done. I would rather have a system in place that does this indiscriminately vs some human decision on what is spam and what isn’t.

Single player, private servers, etc.

I in no way support limiting creativity in this manner. Additionally, there are people with limited playtime that may have spent months building something wonderful and cannot devote time to upkeep who will simply just quit.

This is not something you add 3 years in without losing customers.

If you have a problem with the building situation on a server, it is your responsibility to find a server that suits you. The server nor the game should not be changed to suit you.


Probably 10 times already wrote on the forum that YES, I think it’s a good idea. But:

it is super HUGE unkeep even to small base.

Because this is what will really work

  1. I think there should be a limit up to which unkeep = 0. In addition, for PVE and PVE-C servers, such a limit should clearly be higher, high enough to be enough for something relatively large (I’m thinking about 20,000 - 30,000 blocks).

  2. I must admit that now the buildings are poorly protected. Avatars can completely destroy your base in just a minute, and collecting some avatars takes 2-3 hours. In addition, there are cheaters who open closed storages and chests, so they must be closed with walls. These factors greatly increase the size of buildings. Therefore, I think that if you ass unkeep system, then you need to strengthen the buildings. Otherwise, they are not worth it.

1 Like

These kind of changes already exist for many private servers.

I must ask, if those kind of building rules suit you then why don’t you move to a private server that enforces them, instead of trying to change the existing rules on the official servers?

1 Like

Because official servers are not biased. Are you seriously saying spam building isn’t an issue and a strain on the system that causes pain for all playing? Rules change, as they should, when abuses are observed. Quid pro quo, how is my suggestion any different than any other suggestion that has been offered on these forums?

1 Like

Why not? Why not add something more into a game that is 3 years old to keep things fresh? I sincerely doubt folks will leave anymore than those that left because horses were added. Even if there were folks leaving how is this a loss to the other players or anyone new coming in? Someone that defensive and reactionary over something in a game is probably one that is toxic and I would enjoy watching their building decay into nothingness.

1 Like

It takes a game and makes it a chore. I’m now playing to keep what I already played to build? No thank you. Some of us play games for fun. Can’t just pop in and play how I’d like if I’ve only got and hour, gotta fuel this nonsense upkeep cost.

Funcom has recently changed its TOS to target server halting builds, so you essentially have their response. And it doesn’t involve burdening every player in the game for the actions of certain individuals.


Not fan of Upkeep, It punishes part time players… and does nothing to player who have massive back stocks of goods anyway.

Rather see Land Claim Flags, or some other method of controlling map.


It does not punish if there is a cap at which unkeep = 0.

Em, what? He will spend them on the maintenance of the base. Is that nothing?

5 hours of raid time every day definitely turns the game into a routine, but unkeep does not.

Oh yes, let’s make the rules, but we won’t tell anyone what the exact criteria for bans are. We do not even know them ourselves. We will arrange a lottery, someone will be lucky, and someone will have the entire base removed and banned for 14 days.
There is a lot of freedom in the game, but with limitations, but we do not know what limitations, but you should feel the spirit of limitations as much as we do. And if our opinions do not coincide - ban.

Almost everyone who is against unkeep completely ignores that the size of unkeep and the conditions can be different. They just don’t read this part in principle.

1 Like

While I am not in favor of an upkeep system for various reasons (for example: more grinding work for those who hate harvesting, does little to stop those who truly love to build, its anti-casual players and the concept will not stop spammers) there could be some uses of an upkeep systems if done properly.

This is all based on a single player (not making any suggestions for a clan at this time to avoid an extra layer of complexity to the discussion at this point)

Upkeeps should exclude placeables. Too many variables on placeables and programming to make it work.

For upkeep:
The first 2,000 building blocks should be free of upkeep. You managed to stay within this amount, great, you have no additional costs other than the usual upkeep from purges, raids and such.
The second 2,000 blocks cost 1% of the cost per 2 week cycle which is stored in new container (tax box)
Every additional 2,000 blocks will go up by 1%. In this case, they would be 2% for any blocks between 4,001 and 6,000. 3% for any blocks between 6,001 and 8,000.

So someone with 10,000 blocks for example will have to pay 200 blocks in cost per 2 week cycle. Granted the cost will take into account of the cheaper pieces, tiered materials, walls and such versus foundations, etc. but I just showing a simplistic view of the tax. Anyone who thinks 200 blocks is cheap tax is not looking at how much time and effort goes into making 200 blocks. Granted, it would ask for materials not blocks themselves, but it is still a process to collect and make. In essence, a progressive tax system. (8k would cost 120 blocks)

Why did I make it every 2 weeks instead of 1. As stated before, not to make this a too much of a grind for players / casuals. Exceeding 1,000 blocks is fairly easy for majority of players (as noted in another thread). Which is why I made it free for 2,000 instead of 1,000. We should not penalized those who rather pvp, pve than harvest/build.

This concept will not resolve spamming issues (no tax would). Nor it would resolve other griefing issues/methods either.

This concept or any upkeep system most likely will not be easy to program, and will possibly break 100’s of mods if not almost all of them, which is another reason not to make such a huge change. This idea is more reasonable than some upkeep ideas I have read. Well, food for thought. As stated in the beginning, I am not in favor of upkeeps but am willing to give a reasonable upkeep suggestion.


Upkeep most certainly does, and I don’t play on PvP servers for that very reason, among others. And if you do play PvP, go clean up whatever spam you have a problem with on your own.

Or just go play Rust and quit trying to push those systems here, where they do not make sense.


Simply introducing server moderators would solve this problem for most people.

1 Like

including a monthly subscription… i don’t think many people will really be happy with that

I would definitely not be happy


Said perfectly. No building restrictions! If people want restrictions, find a private server. There is a dedicated section for server recruitment for each of the 3 platforms right here on the forum.


Official servers have one advantage over private servers, and one alone. Stability.

People can play on official servers knowing that the server isn’t going to disappear one day, the server isn’t going to wipe itself, and there won’t be any weird rules that erase their efforts.

What you’re suggesting will end that.

Oh, it is. But your cure is worse than the disease.

Much like the people who show up every once in awhile and swear that the official servers would totally benefit from a wipe every so often. Despite the fact that it has been tried before, and it always results in an empty server.


Ok but what if someone can’t get onto the game for a few days? They lose everything? Not very fair…?

I do agree with you about sleeper posts. It’s much like what I encounter frequently on my 1-player server. Player 2 pops up, scouts past my defenses, gets pelted and I can see he or she is well-leveled. Sleepers who are probably body vaulting are around, they simply wait for my juicy houseboxes to decay and they can creep out and add to they loot.

I’m not a proponent of wiping, generally. I do think it would help people who don’t want to return because of the Body Vault threat. I hear it 3/5 times with returning players. The other 2/5 complain that the server is dead.

A selective server wipe, or the opening of blank new servers would do PvP a world of good. If staged with a Lost Souls Event, we’d have a real great time. I mean a super time.