It was confusing for me as a new user to see 100,000 vertice objects be treated as low as 0.5 L (with 8 materials) because it was under 1m of size, but a 64m x 64m CUBE with 8 vertices could balloon so high (or a 128 vertice lo poly wall with optimized trim sheet textures woudl be 30Li).

Land impact should also consider how many materials are on an object (how many draw calls), and their texture size as well.

Efficient creators should be rewarded for their work, not punished.

Also LI "workarounds" where creators put 100,000 vertices on a lamp object for 0.5Li then enter 0 for ever other LOD should be considered a cheat, and the land impact put more on the quality of their LODs.

This sounds an interesting idea Signal Linden AS LONG AS the change does not increase the LI of ANY currently rezzed objects. I have a 30K region which is almost full (about 1.5K li left) and if the 30K suddenly gets exceeded by a recalc of existing assets then im in trouble? Not sure what would happen - will assets disappear? be returned? which ones? That would be a total disaster - so please let us know asap what the plan is in that respect? thank you. (What i would REALLY LOVE of course is a new option to up the sim limit to 40 or 50K - and would be happy to pay a bit more for this - but thats on another Feedback request)

I don't think simply eliminating the scale impact would really fix things. As others have pointed out, there's other factors at play here, some of which aren't immediately obvious.

What I do think would be useful, is a prim weight "breakdown" tool, basically a dialog box or even a chat dump, that tells you what a given object's cost is, and which factors account for that. Knowing that an object's physics weight is abnormally high (esp. if it's not really used as a physics-enabled object in the first place) would be really helpful, for example.

Hi, I'm against this. Allowing people to create large, poorly optimized objects with a high LOD of 100k triangles and a lowest LOD of just 1 triangle is not a good idea. This kind of content is already one of the reasons why people complain about Second Life’s poor performance.

At one point, you had a good idea — using animesh LI calculation without the skeleton penalty. Why did you give up on this nice approach?

my hope for this has increased 10 fold now i finally am seeing the out of pocket contrarian takes from people who don't get it, which is like the hallmark of a good feature, or from people who are arguing against it but by complaining about some other thing which is, like, ok

Gonna say I'm against it. Especially given that more often than not, LI changes with scale due to poorly-implemented physics, in my observation. Watched a friend resize a mesh boulder, LI jumped up, but when I rightclicked > edit > more info, it was the PHYSICS weight that jumped up by orders of magnitude.

I'm absolutely against it.

Reason: I've studied the current model, and it has a lot of advantages!

Once you combine the right parts, you can drastically reduce the LI!

I was able to reduce the over 500 regular LI on my Linden Home, through clever combinations, to well below the maximum permitted 351 LI. Even so much that I was able to rez my sailboat if I wanted to.

Nevertheless, I agree with you: the current system is far too complicated and should be simplified considerably.

So will items currently rezzed in world change impact UPWARD and then we'll lose the latest rezzed item on parcel to autoreturn?

Many No copy gacha items are detailed and we've sized them down - is there a risk they get bounced if impact rises and then are lost?

I shop, not build ,so keeping my places happy are my current and future focus.

As a counterpoint ... cap avatar height to 6.5 feet. 8 foot avatars need bigger EVERYTHING and that uses more Land impact. Sometimes I think by design.

Signal, I'm sure you know and this was an oversight and sorry to be pedantic but it shouldn't be spread erroneously, Blinn-Phong materials- - do in fact switch an object to the new mesh accounting system. Specular and/or custom Normals, pre PBR, do change traditional prims and sculpted prims to use mesh calculations, for good or ill. (Plan ahead accordingly on your linkset, it can even be for good, though there are of course other ways to flip accounting systems as well.)

IF, and it's a huge IF, this doesn't blow up the LI on anything on the smaller side that's rezzed, yes. If it does, well, you've just wrecked a bunch of regions. It may not be great practice (I have Opinions, but let's just not), but small scale detailed rezzables have absolutely been incentivized over large scale builds when it comes to mesh, from day 1. You're also not throwing out Download as a calculation entirely if you remove scale and respect small costs...but you pretty much are.

But also, I have to laugh- "The goal should be that users should not be surprised when working with LI"- LI by scale is SO MUCH MORE PREDICTABLE than PHYSICS LI. I can make educated guessed on LI by scale and I'm usually in the ballpark. Physics LI doesn't report itself correctly in the uploader, is a complete and total mystery with Analyze, and has the wonderful??? effect of often reducing physics LI when you make an object ...and I'm not even going to get into the .5m issue or DOOR PHYSICS /cry. (Now, Physics working the scale to LI way it does actually makes logical sense the uploader gives zero clues what is going to happen, you have to actually uploaded an object and set it to the correct Physics, at the correct scale, to know what it actually will do. And that goes double for knowing when to use Analyze. I always figured the LI scale thing was a tradeoff because things would be visible, and therefore load, at higher LODs from father away, as LOD is more or less based on the size of the object on the users screen.)