in my case i should say for the sake of semantics. i have not seen anyone asking for the way this changes are being implemented.
AND it happens you are an expert on coding? if you are not, let the expert comes and say if it is possible or not to have both systems in game, @CodeMage … time will tell if the modding community comes with the old functionality back.
the only thing @codemage said that there was a finnancial cost associated with keeping the code working, but he never said it was not possible to have both system in game, (pretty sure experienced modders, and /or people like codemage will know better)
myself i see not obstacles to ahve both if funcom decided to go that route.
I remember the tavern system announcement they said something on the lines of “some of the best adventures start at the tavern” and that they said it will offer quests and things.
Well not really. Tavern system introduced nothing apart from looking cool, and getting once in a blue moon named thrall. No quests or adventures. Just npcs that like to creep behind doors that are closed or that like to stand in spaces between my walls.
With the living settlements, they shouldn’t be releasing it bare bones until we have a way to actually control features of it.
I don’t know if we’ll see quests added to the tavern. But the statement about the best adventurers start in a tavern has to do with the tabletop gaming trope of every fantasy dice game campaign starts in a tavern. The seventh largest airforce IRL started in a tavern too… so there’s that.
The alternative path through the Sacred Hunt event was facilitated through the Tavern system. It’s more of a minor questline for sure, but a questline nonetheless.
Aside from that, despite being one of my favourite additions in terms of aesthetics, I agree the tavern system could do far more than it does currently. I wouldn’t be surprised if a few companion quests can be started in the future from the tavern, it seems like a no-brainer way to integrate the two features.
The problem is that the PC code put out for beta test is the same code they send to the Console overlords for their approval. What you see in beta is what will be released. With luck, any bugs that get reported will be fixed in the 1st or 2nd hotfix, or in the next chapter. Even things that should be show stoppers (all followers will be deleted) will not be addressed in the normal course of things.
Reducing the number of thrall? Are you serious?
People are complaining that they will not have enough place for more thrall and you want to reduce the number even more?
You see…i built a RP town on official, so i am the targeted audience of the living settlements.
It took me a year to build first a hotel on the shattered bridge and once i got enough materials and trained enough pet and thrall, i entirely demolished the hotel to built a big town with everything: Crafting tables, taverns, every shrine and three RP building.
Because my friends were gone since month if not a year, i quietly reached 90/125 thralls/pet/mount to make the town and my outposts populated and lively.
I trained all of them at level 20 and filled every working stations possible for this goal as well.
I only needed to make them armors and the project would have been completed.
Suddenly my friends decided to play the game again, they don’t want to actually use any of my stations, built their own base and capture their own thrals instead to use what i have.
The number of thralls jumped from 90 to 107, not mentionning their workers.
If your living settlements will be pushed as you are planning right now, i was asked by my friends to sacrifice enough of the thralls that i took time to train and equip.
My RP town will be emptied instead of being more lively, which was the supposed goal of the living settlements.
I am the targeted audience and i say: This change is unwanted because it actually ruin my RP project instead to improve it.
I am not the only one to think that way, far from it when i asked around.
The only way to see your so called “improvement” acceptable, is to put the workers on a separate limit like 50.
As for the performance issue, it’s known that you bought the cheapest option at Gportal so instead to plague the players experience on official that will make them leave the game, why not investing in more efficient servers to begin?
Yup pet peeve. I’d leave it at that but since a certain person either quit or finally got banned and all their kingdoms decayed, the server is running quite notably better.
Yes I know but isn’t it so funcom to make a rule about villages then update the game to have lively villages?
Like making a rule about bridges then give us an update that has treasure that has to be carried and can’t be swam with so demands bridges.
So you’re the person to blame this on.
Alt aren’t real people. Your lively villages lagged the server down, do you even care how your builds, and need to have lots of thralls doing nothing effected everyone else game?
Once again at this time a ToC violation. People like you are part of the reason why the public servers suck.
How many chests, crates, and vaults of content do you have? A dozen? 5 dozen? 25 dozen? Do you even know?
If you have a few dozen crates of unsorted NPC loot you may be a hoarder.
But that isn’t what the public servers are for. That may be your playing style but do you understand just how your playing style effects everyone on the server with you?
Wont ague with you about the bargain basement servers, but do you get that you are making it fathoms worse for people trying to play on your server?
If you want to RP take to an RP server. If you want to build your own lively village, do it on your server not the one you share with other players.
Oh ya, that is a trigger for me and sorry you became the target of my ire for a player that you sound so much like.
And yes this is my opinion but it is base on the marked improvement of how the server I play on runs with the loss of just one person. A verified hoarder in every aspect of the game, with multiple “lively villages” around the map.
And I’ll say it again, even as bad as funcom is treating us and the game, I’d sub to a plain vanilla, no mods, funcom moderated server. And I’m not the only one.
I only wanted to quit the forum because of all the implied “improved communication” just was not happening. That seems to be changing but we’ll see.
Even if they put workers on a separate list you do still run into performance issues in the end, so dropping thrall count even lower may be a must to make settlements work without a significant hit.
Everything has a price , from animations to new mechanics they all take a toll on servers and hardware.
Tradeoffs in many cases have to made in order for you to get some of these nice things, a toll has to be collected and it’s usually mandatory.
Are people going to build less so others have a smoother experience across servers and hardware? You can’t count on people just to chip in, you have to make it mandatory through imposed limits.
I know you don’t like it, but yes they do have to keep performance in the back of their mind, it’s not just a PC issue they have to also keep in mind the lower end hardware of consoles as well.
By the way they did not say they WILL reduce thrall limit, they said they may have to, but they don’t know yet.
It’s not a given they will have to reduce them, they are just getting this bit out of the way so no one is surprised, they may have to… it’s not a guarantee though.
Settlements we’re working with crafters. So we all take a hit on our thralls count , so we can SEE thralls wander around ? And a límites number od them ? A tradeoff that in My books really sucks.
There are clans with 10 people … That has other bases And outposts.
This thing might work Well for single player or small clans. I can’t SEE this as a good thing for large clans.
There are mixed messages. Howrver i hace seen small Villages that seems to be ok.
You do ubderstand funcom could relax restrictions by improving server hardware ? I mean they turned this Game into a cash generating machine with the store , i AM quite sure they could being down deserted servers ( there are planty of those ) and upgrade the active ones.
So we play on a 6 to 7 years old hardware and we are the performance problem ? I think there is a problem. And it can’t be only the players.
Game has becone more complex yet the hardware offered is the same as to when the Game is released.
I AM ok with enforcing rules on HuGE builds. A small Villages should not be a problem .
So - thralls will be actively looking for beds and chairs in the base in the future.
Our base is on a PVE server and of course we want it to be both practical and (given that there are some limitations) nice.
However, for years we have preemptively avoided purely “decorative” buildings.
But really, none of us wants our bed to become a public bedchamber.
So I added an extra floor to the three buildings and put in 20 extra beds and some benches as a precaution. Hopefully FC will take this into consideration when they ban players for decorative buildings in the future.
Yeah, they are obligated to at this point.
I foresee this whole update is going to be a bit of a pain-point for more reasons than just the server performance. Most people won’t be placing their beds next to crafting stations and such, and may not even build on top of their workshops.
The Turanian market-/tents bazaar pack for example looks off once you start building up too high, so in my build i don’t have second floors on the buildings meant to look like tents.
There will very likely be people building several houses or large barracks just stuffed with beds and amenities… since NPCs also will not use elevators things such as stairwells and bridges may become a more common sight just to accomodate the system they plan to implement.
i am going to need pop corn when this update hits,
funcom ability to forsee issues i think its not really there. they will find quickly they made a mistake.
just worse than the combat changes that got that pushback.
i really cant undertand their logic here, they could have done the same thing with thralls already deployed without messing up with a lot of systems, some of those were working without issues.
(idle guard? not doing something? the wandering system kicks in, guards guarding, or doing an emote… the wandering system does not kick in.) you see, in this scenario, players have total control on how , and how many will wander, brining the same life to the settlement, without the need of doing all of this that will end up hurting more than it gives. for crafter they could have added 2 or more emotes in their benches, so there is some form of variety and they dont look like doing the same, add the ability to change their clothing using a bench (As in the mod) and they will ahve a very very happy players, with a settlement working exactly as the player want it to function, and they did not had to restrict or give players something we cant control. but it looks like funcom likes to do things more complicated. @Community@den (for visibility)
add the wandering logic to guard , archers, performers and bearers. to kick in if not doing somethjing, give us total control of our settlement. keep the sandbox part intact!
i barely saw complaints of how the crafters thralls were working… all of this without any real practical benefits to any players.
well as mentioned, i ll have enough pop corn here for peoples reception of this “feature” and how it is going to affect large clans.
