OR They could do what 7DTD does and regenerate each quest POI at the start of the quest. It does not matter if you completely destroy a Quest POI in 7DTD because when you start the quest the POI is completely regenerated. Both are built with the Unity engine.
And why shouldn't they? That is, not technically a switch all the time but some setup that allows the player to destroy the core after he has completed the POI. Almost all POIs are intended to be "disposable". The player "uses" them by completing it, usually attacking and killing all the mobs there but in general could be anything the mission creator designed. Whatever the goal after the player reaches it and completes the mission, there's no longer a reason to preserve the POI. It's done. The whole purpose of the indestructibility is to prevent the player from derailing the mission or to keep him restricted to the dungeon's available paths. After completion this purpose vanishes so there's no reason to keep it indestructible. The only exception I can think of, is a major trade station that is not intended to be attacked and that should persist over the whole game as a neutral trading point. It's perfectly fine to have these kind of POIs be indestructible indefinitely. All the other POIs are disposable. Once they have served their purpose you can simply let the player do whatever he wants with them. For these, always design a way to kill the core. Can be simple, can be complex, but have it there.
There are a few situations when a POI might need to never be destroyed or taken over by a player. Rare though.
Yes, there likely are such cases. I could only think of that trade station case but probably some other circumstances also exist where you must not allow the player to destroy it. Keeping these rare cases as permanently indestructible should be no problem. As long as there is a clear, definite reason why it must be so. In general, though, you should always allow the player to take over or salvage the POI *after* he has completed it, even story mission ones.
It's also to protect "anchor" POIs (like the drone base that is required for some automated attacks), and to make sure players do not bypass material/ resource limits set by a scenario by simply putting all the planet's content in his/ her pockets. That is also a question of scenario design, if someone just fills up all playfields with lots of structures but does not want the player to get the resources to build a huge CV/BA right away. There are many angles to this topic that can not reduce the admin core usage to single POIs, a scenario can require a player to navigate back and forth between several POIs and even between different playfields, he may have to fight in some POIs but not allowed to break them, etc. In any case, I want to see a player picking up all the rock layers and leave a planet bare with only its lava layer before I give more weight to player entitlement to dictate designer's jobs. Habits created by playing the game since we could make a top CV on the starter world should not be the basis to define how the game should evolve or not.
I think I have to disagree there, at least a bit... I grant you that you can have some exceptional cases where a POI needs to be a certain type and contain certain things that would amount to a total that would be overpowered when salvaged and unbalance the game. Yes, these cases exist and I'm fine with them. However, my point is that these should be the rare exceptions. You should not have these left and right and everywhere. Instead, if you find that your POI would result in an unbalanced OP situation if the player got it, then I think your *first* consideration at this point ought to be whether your POI actually needs to be the way you built it. Does it really have to be combat steel? Is there a purpose for all those high-level devices you put in there? Or, are all of these there just for their looks? Because if that's the reason then you should actually be using concrete blocks texture-camouflaged to look something else, deco devices standing for the real ones, and the combination of differently shaped armor blocks to create the appearance of more complicated machinery. You don't *need* to put advanced constructors there unless there's a need for the player to actually use that advanced constructor. And same with everything else. Remember the classic advice for plot design: "Only put a gun on the stage if a character is going to use it." Instead of categorically denying the player the option to make use of the POI, design it in such a way, that it would be totally fine for the player to do so. That results in a much more enjoyable game-universe that works intuitively as players expect a normal world to work. That is, if the POI is indestructible then we expect there to be some reason for it, that would make sense in the logic of the game universe, and that these would be some exceptional places that you find only rarely.
Unless players have been playing only Empyrion, they should be used by now that some props they "think" they could use can not be used or picked up. I'm not saying I like/ don't like : it has been like this since "loot in games" exist, and lots of deco and level geometry are only there for the looks. What some players are asking here may require a "culture" change to the game, not just to POI design. Players want to scavenge because they think they can pick up everything, but that's just a sticker on a box and not a real garantee of good gameplay. Some like foot combat, some don't, and forcing everyone into a tight space with spawners all around is not my cup of tea at all, in any game. I think many players would not mind about admin cores if other aspects of the game were more satisfying and balanced for them. If I was to build a scenario, I would not use the game's default POIs because they do not fit with what I have in mind. I would use a lot of hybrid POIs where parts are completely destructible and other parts indestructible. I would show clear hints at what is what so players do not waste time testing each and every block in a base to see if it can be damaged. I would also avoid the "cube" design and link several structures together but still treat them as "one", and I would surely rely on "corridors" to force players into specific paths but they would be large, and rooms would not be crampy either, except specifics. I am not excluding anything but I have just seen too much from other games to be satisfied by the POI format used in Empyrion up to now. Scenarios keep "breaking" because POIs are too crampy, players get swarmed by critters spawning on them, they have no room to move, no warnings, no suspense buildup. Sounds can be heard from everywhere, and we can only use 1 soundtrack per POI (but not with decals!). In fact given the amount of tools we were given in the last 2 years there are no more reasons to make small "dungeons" crammed with loot and devices, designed like a maze that folds on itself with several floors above each other. Unfortunately, a few key things are still missing from the toolbox to allow a change of "culture" in POI design on a large scale (ex. custom stamps to fit terrain with large structures, ability to link/ place several structures together, signals/ triggers that communicate between structures to avoid usage of scenario/ dialog, devices that send signals etc). Currently and for the past years, POIs have been made with no precise "scenario" in mind (because there was no story to start with) so players associate POIs to just another of the standard "sandbox" elements, hence they should be "salvageable". But the game lore could say some materials can not be destroyed by common means/ tools, not all of a planet can be digged or mined, and the galaxy is not filled with random structures but with organized civilizations (and some random stuff peppered here and there) that have cities and relevant architecture (bridges, dams, roads, harbors, etc). The closest we come to this now are small villages and POI clusters, and still nothing between all of them (roads, pipelines, power lines, etc). The "damage" model to structures could also be improved a bit : instead of leaving full blocks and perfectly square edges after an explosion, structure blocks could be replaced by their "broken" version past a certain amount of damage. These blocks could yield no steel plates, and concrete shouldn't be salvageable at all, at any time.
The way I understand the mission system in EGS, it's a necessity for avoiding breaking bugs that some story POIs be undestructible. But it needs to be done so to not appear artificial, you still must have to 'win' something for attacking these POIs - and btw you must NOT beforehand know that they are undistructable. That's IMO how it should go to make the game feel good when playing these Admin POIs. Currently you can't do that without breaking missions. So: undestructible until you play the story. And other POIs? There must be good reasons why they are undestructible, but will I care and be obset? There are so many 'normal' POIs in this game...
I'd just like to make a counter-request to the OP and any agreeing with them. MOAR admin-cored POIs. I love them. Granted, they do suit my exact playstyle of peeling off defenses and then clearing the interior on foot. I have little interest in chipping through walls to take out POIs with the one exception being auxiliary defense POIs, those I want to nuke and move on. For admin-cored POIs, I like them since I like to clear my way through. Thing is, if the whole thing is destructible, I've occasionally destroyed methods of progression with errant explosions. I like explosions. I particularly like them only destroying things I intend them to. That, and indestructible blocks means more options for building with things like glass or things that would otherwise look cool, but couldn't take more than a couple hits before no longer being a wall. Only non-trader POIs I know of that can't be destroyed at all are the Abandoned Atlas Mine and Abandoned Tomb. Not 100% if they're in vanilla or only in Project Eden. But the former is a very pretty POI with good loot and is fun to explore, and the latter is likewise pretty and enjoyable, but is just top-tier when it comes to secrets and hidden stuff. Specifically the Abandoned Tomb would have no secrets if it could simply be blown up, even so much as that if the core could be destroyed at all you could just take it apart top to bottom without the fun of exploring. If I accidentally broke a trap or feature because I shot a fragile motion sensor, that would suck. So yeah, there's plenty of stuff to flatten with a rocket barrage from a vessel, how about more stuff that's just meant to be explored?
