An idea for an upkeep system

But my point is pvp servers are not that. It is pvb(ase). There are 9nly a very few real pvp players. Most are lifers who spend 50 hours a week on game. Which is why I still want official 24/7 dbd servers. No safe farm times. you on, you may have to pvp. You log off, 1 hour cool down and your base is safe. Then we can call them pvp servers. And a maintenance system would force players to log on ore than 15 mins a week. Again, I understand you play to the rules, but that is why pvp officials are so dead and have refreshers. It makes you choose normal social life vs gamer full time life. And most pvp type players want to fight other players, not offline bases or log in just to babysit. There is not enough content to warrant always being on for me. I did that for 6 months early on. Burned out and stopped enjoying it when I realized most players avoided fights on pvp and would wait until you took off 1 or 2 days and then God your base.

1 Like

This seems like a potentially good idea, but my question is will this proposed upkeep occupy too much game time to manage? Like big base people will need to grind for longer just to keep afloat in the game? Which means they might have to play for longer hours? And what if they can’t do that? Like full time workers with families to look after for example? These people might only have two hours in the early morning to enjoy the game before life takes over, do they now have to use that time just to manage upkeep? Will this mean less time to play the game?

That is entirely up to the player. The idea is that there should be a link between how “big” you want to build and how much time you want to spend on upkeep, for a certain definition of “big”. I’ve left that definition somewhat vague on purpose, because different definitions will have different impact on people’s playstyle. My personal preference is to define “big” in terms of total surface area claimed.

Again, the idea is to have a “sane default”. Up to a certain size, the upkeep should be trivial. Anything over that adds more and more time and effort required.

I have a full time job and a family to look after. I can squeeze in some time during the week, but most of my CE playtime is over the weekends. So yeah, I know what you’re talking about.

Here’s the thing: when you say “big base people”, that’s not really something we can discuss easily, because if you ask 10 people what “big base” means, you’ll get 12 different opinions.

As I explained above, the idea is that the upkeep should be trivial up to a certain size. People who want to build bigger than that and keep all their things standing have several options, some of which would be:

  • Spend more time on grinding for the upkeep and less on other activities.
  • Clan up with other people so that the upkeep resources can be pooled and shared.
  • Rely on donations from others (e.g. for public infrastructure like public map rooms or jousting arenas or whatnot).
  • Play on a private server where there’s no upkeep or the upkeep is lower.

I’m not sure why people are even asking about size. Its pretty simple right? If your base is 2x the size as mine, you pay double the upkeep. So if the upkeep is too much, reduce the build size to something manageable.

Also if you all have kids, use them to farm for you. Make getting stone, wood, and iron as part of their chores while you’re cooking and cleaning. Just turn the chat off to keep the creepers away.

People aren’t going to like this. But it stands to reason, if you’ve flopped a big base on the middle of the map for everyone to see, you need to maintain it. After farming all the legendaries, and everything else, if you want people to stare at your base, you gotta work for it.

Almost a sin asking people to socialize in a multiplayer game. You should be ashamed. :stuck_out_tongue:

Time to hide from the pitchforks and torches.

Preach it.

That’s it.

I’ve tried everything. Nice guy. Nuking guy. Guy you can trust. Guy whose teammates you hate but trust him, or the other way around. You get to a point where you’re just insipid and nurturing to any new player who’ll keep you from playing with yourself, once again.

I’m just another player, it don’t matter what I think. Or what you think. And that sucks.


That is why for a while 9n PS4, my clan would server hop and challenge Alphas. And what we found out was most of those Alphas were not pvpers. they turtled up, scooped and scooted, and just tried to out last us. They were pve’ers who would troll off new players to keep server to themselves. They used the 18 hours (at the time, now 19) to mass farm and stash in body vaults, fake noob clans etc. then would just bubble up, and log in an watch the layer list (PS4) for any new players. spawn camp or for them at sandstone level.

1 Like

It’s disgusting, man. Listen I can totally get turtling as a tactic. I have done it whilst being bombed in my face. Sometimes you gotta drink the potion and run.

But don’t make it a master plan.

My crystalline moments in this wonderful game are distinct: I have had one really good PvP fight, on launch day. Before that, one day during 24/7 PvP I tried to approach an enemy clan base, and before I knew it I was lacerated and crying. Proper thrall defenses kept me from ever spying on their base. Two moments in a snow globe.

1 Like

Not necessarily. What you described would be the simplest upkeep cost function: just a linear function, with no bells and whistles.

I don’t want to get bogged down by the details of the upkeep cost function, but I do want to emphasize that my idea – even in its simplest form – wouldn’t use just a linear function. Instead, it would be constant below a certain threshold. In other words, if your build is “smaller” than a certain threshold, your upkeep is a trivial constant; above that, the real cost is calculated based on your build “size”.

People don’t like it every time it’s mentioned. I’ve done my best to make the idea palatable, by including things like “below a certain threshold the upkeep is trivial” and “anything could be converted into fuel using the ‘secondary’ bench”. But no matter how palatable I make it, there will be people who won’t like it. That’s how the world works :man_shrugging:

I know that’s tongue-in-cheek, but I want to point out that Funcom has a big share of fault here. On a PVE(-C) server, the incentives are against clanning up. In my original post here, I deliberately didn’t examine how the system would interact with the clan system, because I feared it would bog down the discussion even more. Personally, I think that the upkeep system should actively incentivize people in clans. The more people you have in your clan, the higher your “trivial upkeep threshold” should be. But again, that’s just my opinion, and I know it’s going to draw the ire of solo players :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

I have delved into Myth of Empires to try and understand this point of view. Your input is enormously valuable to me, so it was incumbent I feel the weight of an actual upkeep system.

During my time in a clan, I felt little motivation to contribute to the upkeep as my holdings were stupidly small in comparison. This made me a tad resentful. As a solo, this punishing system actually has kept me away from playing recently. It’s just not fun.

This isn’t saying your proposed way would be unfun. I rather like @biggcane55’s solution of gradual decay, blunting and rust. Plus incendiaries in the chest can sweat and produce explosive results if you’re too idle. A thoughtful system, one put in place with a plan and a design. This is yet another reason why PvE and PvP should part paths. But that’s for another thread.


I’ve been hearing a lot of good things about Myth of Empires. Sadly, by the time I decided it might be a good idea to try it out, they got slapped with a lawsuit (or whatever happened) and pulled out of Steam catalog :confused:

Honestly, I haven’t thought of that at all. That’s a very good point. I don’t know what I would have to change in my proposal to mitigate it without jeopardizing the goals I have for my idea, but thanks for bringing it up, I’ll just have to mull it over :slight_smile:

No, let’s face it, my proposal is unfun, there’s no way around it. I tried to blunt the “unfun-ness” of it, but it’s meant to be unfun past a certain threshold, and the “bigger” you get the less fun it’s supposed to be.

It’s not that I think Conan Exiles needs an upkeep system to be more fun. As far as I’m concerned, I would rather not have an upkeep system at all, but that’s the best solution I could find for a real problem that I honestly think is keeping official PVE(-C) servers back, and possibly affecting Funcom’s bottom line.

There are other possible solutions. One would be to introduce a system that allowed formal, limited-scale clan wars – with building destruction – on PVE(-C) servers. Another would be to repurpose the Purge and make it work as a counterforce to building and serial refreshing. But each of those would deserve a topic of its own.

Yes, but I’m still not convinced that’s feasible at all.


I enjoy Myth of Empires, I run a server without any decay (which I think many private servers do the same) due to the system is brutal. I haven’t played on the official servers but my guild mates have and they were repairing the bases consistently when it was not upkeeped on time. I am sure this will be tweaked since it would drive casuals away.

Note personal bases were 2 days decay, while a guild base is a week. You may only have up to 3 guild bases (assuming you actually level the guild that high - time consuming aspect). The game sort forces the guild bases outer walls to be built in circles due to the boundary range although I guess a guild can build a square within the circle radius if they choose but that will shrink their area by a large chunk. And with all the stations and such, would make it hard for it all to fit without feeling it was clustered together like a big mess.

Plus as I noted somewhere, the system would force players/clans to find premium spots on the map due to build limitations. No more build anywhere concepts since it would be less ideal. Unless you can alter the build area shape.

Plus bridges and such would be impossible to maintain in this environment.

Also it will wreck havoc on existing bases which is never good.

1 Like

Or maybe it was a joke? :thinking:

1 Like

Kinda. But its something I’ve seen done in World of Warcraft and other MMORPGs. Kids are usually extensions of the parents in these sort of things.

Just keep in mind if your kid does something stupid, you’re responsible for it.

FC doesn’t grant access to the account, its Valve/Microsoft/Epic/Sony. As far as I know, Steam allows for kids to play on their parent’s account, not sure about the others. FC would have no clue of the difference. And I’m willing to wager wouldn’t care if you let your kid, spouse, partner, friend, or resident hobo play on your account for whatever reason. You’re just responsible for their actions.



Thanks! It’s a long thread, so I’m grateful you went through it as best you could before posting an in-depth and thoughtful reply :slight_smile:

It would if they implemented it like that. I’m not proposing that. I’m proposing to have an upkeep cost function that has a threshold. Below that threshold, you pay a constant upkeep cost, set low enough that it would hardly cost you anything for one week of upkeep. The idea behind that is to set a certain threshold of “how much” you can build without seeing any difference between the current system and the upkeep system.

I just want to point out that this is a common misconception. Funcom clarified that they reverted it not because it was unpopular, but because it degraded server performance badly. I used to have a source for that handy, but I lost my browser bookmarks when I got the new computer and I’m too lazy to go digging again.

I can’t argue here, because I haven’t played Rust (or Ark or any of those), but I do want to ask: isn’t Rust PVP? The worst problems with the current decay system can be seen on PVE(-C) servers, rather than PVP.

It’s not that I don’t sympathize, but if I had to choose between “community projects need community support” and the current status quo on the PVE(-C) officials, I would always choose the former.

I mean, yes, “some kind of in-game activity” is exactly what I’m proposing. Maybe I shouldn’t have made the following bit optional, but rather included it as the integral part of the proposal:

The idea behind that secondary placeable was to make it so that anything you do when playing – as long as it isn’t just AFKing or chatting – would help you pay your upkeep.

Do you think it would be better to edit my original post and make that a necessary part of my suggestion?

1 Like

I agree with this idea. I’d prefer to have a minimum required playtime to fill however I chose rather than be limited to grinding for things to “fuel” my base timer/decay. I’d also hate for a building limit to be placed on officials, so I hope this is not the action Funcom takes.

If you are THE Ceronesthes from Youtube, I love your PVP story videos, they are very well done.


For what its worth, you are correct that this is the reason behind the change. Though I don’t have a source for it either.

1 Like

Ok I think that’s all my questions answered lol, excellent!

By the way good job on replying to everyone!


The problem that u guys is trying add layer of chore or restrictions on game that only pushes people away. Plus it add server issues.

So let’s make it fun use system that tallies up decay timer. So max hours will send gods to spot if upkeep not paid. And will destroy everything.

So things bridges walls that u want upkeep for make effort easy to pay but fun. Put mobile alter and either kill ur self or bound thrall.

Pluss use religion system so based on religion is base on upkeep.

So either anything that is up keep less 100 hours is not activated but once ur building is max hours then upkeep tax applied and based on religion determines up keep