Keeping Decay on Pure

[Death]

Now that we've enabled decay for an entire wipe we'd like to collect player feedback to see if you'd like to keep it enabled, or prefer to go back to how it was without decay. Feel free to share feedback after you submit your vote.

[Rosetoo]

Decay hasn't been an issue for my teammate and I and even gives us something to do once things normally slow way down. Thank you for bringing Decay to pure.

[Helikopter]

The decay is good at 50%

Edited 9 hours ago by Helikopter

[wanderer]

Decay keeps people busy at the start of wipe farming up for base upkeep so the roads and monuments are not permanently cleaned out for the first few days,  it's an improvement for me.

[fuddbutter]

I like that I have something to do later in wipe! lets go to 150%!! 

[QueenBee]

Make 100% decay 50% aint enough easy upkeep this wipe 

[jifide_436]

Keep decay, 50% doesnt bring any issues, almost no effect. But the game feels more rust.

[FreeManStars]

Hi everybody! The decay is a good thing. It has helped somewhat to destroy the bases of some players who abandon the wipe after just a few days of playing. This keeps the map healthier and less cluttered with useless bases.

EDIT : These #&*! huge bases where you wonder what they’re even for, and especially what’s inside them besides empty space. But of course, everyone is free to play however they want..

The problem is when you’re flying around in a helicopter and come across a whole row of bases — my PC just can’t handle it anymore, and a crash is almost guaranteed! At this stage of the wipe, it’s not a big deal, but at the beginning, 2,250 scrap really hurts!  Even when you walk through there, it lags just like in AA11!

Yes to 100% decay! I’m all for it, and I’ll shout it loud and clear!

 

 

Edited 11 hours ago by FreeManStars

[Dexter The Duck]

I love it. 50% feels just about right

 

[MojaveNeon]

This has been a great addition to the server. Would love to see it raised above 50%. 

[Sabata]

I feel like decay should not affect boats and buildings far from major monuments (water bases for example), but I don't know Rust server administration so I have no clue how it should be implemented (or if it is even possible).
I get that decay gives an endgame objective to those near wipe who already have full chests.
My friend and I started playing very remote from the continent, doing a few things here and there with a small port and a couple boats, and we have to mind the decay of the port, the decay of his boat, and the decay of mine...
I'm going to vote no to keeping decay for that reason.

Edited 4 hours ago by Sabata

[MaGa-Rush]

I'll tell you my pov.. a relatively new player this being the second wipe but with a lot of time spent on the server over 700 hours . That these servers are mostly used by players who want to learn the game and do it without stress.I think decay is a stress factor, especially if you don't have much time for the game.Another part of the players are those who know the game but don't have time, having family jobs and other problems and playing to get rid of daily stress but as much time as their time allows. These two categories will be the most affected and in the majority do not even participate in the vote and when they see your changes, the vast majority will look for another server. My opinion is that they don't build monstrous bases... They don't put 6-10 turbines on the base and mostly the lagg is not due to them. I think that the decrease in the number of those who will play on servers will be directly proportional to the increase in the percentage of decays...an active player can build and maintain 2 bases per day..., meaning at the end of the wipe about 60 bases... on which to put 6-10 turbines each and do more harm than those who also have a base, woe to it but they don't have the time and knowledge to automate the tc...