Now you understand how I felt about thrall limits.
“When the morning comes, and a new sunrise, let it go, this too shall pass.”
3 Likes
So exactly what pay to win advantages would I and fellow offline singleplayers, private server administrators, or even PvE players derive from this? A more plausible explanation may be that for years now the player base has been requesting more storage options, and this provided what so many players have been clamoring for.
5 Likes
Ok lets put it this way. What in your opinion is ACCURATE about the undead horse description? In what way does it describe the item?
I want to make a necromancer sorcerer, so Im looking into undead stuff. I would get undead horse. Its not undead. I understand that a battlepass is supposed to be only cosmetic stuff but WHY DOESN’T IT SAY SO THEN. Im not looking for P2W here, just flavor.
1 Like
Then why are you asking for it to be paid only? Asking for storage options to be added to basic game is one thing. Asking for it to be buy only (which is what the Bazaar is) is asking for a Pay to Win advantage. You are either ignorant or making a false statement.
If you say “I didn’t realize this was about Bazaar items.” Then I’ll consider it ignorance.
If not, I’ll call you a liar, or disingenuous at best.
Which is it?
1 Like
Please indicate where exactly in my post I was quote “asking for it to be paid only” or “asking it to be buy only”. Here let me tell you; I did not. Period. Please refrain from making misleading strawman statements. You made a sweeping and ill informed inference, which @CodeMage has also already called out, that that people who wanted to acquire or keep this were making a deliberate or calculated effort to gain an unfair advantage over their fellow players. I correctly pointed out that in Offline Singleplayer there is no one else for me to gain an advantage over, and that PvE players are not in direct competition with each other, thus disproving this. The truth is that I would much, and I do mean MUCH prefer to have additional storage options added as a free content update as opposed to buying them. But much like additional Crom items, both of which I have been requesting for years now, if presented with only two options: pay for them or do without, I can tell which I would and did elect.
I will wait and gauge your reply before responding to this in my next post.
2 Likes
I understand what you mean, this would have somewhat be solved if they had it written more clearly
Or added it in a different way 
1 Like
Whether you play by yourself, with others, or in competition with other players is IRRELEVANT. The fact remains that buying an advantage over others is pay to win in any case. The issue isn’t the damage that you would cause players with such advantages, the issue is what the provider (in this case Funcom) would do to players.
There are hundreds of games that are singleplayer only with Pay to Win mechanics. Utilizing this predatory practice to cause problems for players while also providing a solution, should the players pay for it. This isn’t something that should be supported by our community
2 Likes
Ayesh.
So many people hostilely talking past each other.
This one, in principle, agrees with @Taemien.
The principle being the Bazaar items should be cosmetic only.
This one sees no harm in having storage items in the Bazaar or Battle Pass which are merely reskins of existing storage options with the same slots and comparable footprint/durability.
However, this one has to dovetail on a different point and agree with @Croms_Faithful (et al) that some of the things behind the paywall are things that have been much requested for years. Thus, the majority of those going for it are unlikely to be desirous of a pay for advantage situation. They wanted better storage. Better storage became available. They decided it was worth their money. They acquired. They did not seek advantage. They sought gratification of a long held desire. In this regard, this one very much blames the game and not the player.
Furthermore, the lack of clarity in the emporium so that customers can make informed decisions is absolutely horrible. Some item descriptions are outright fraudulent in their statements. This should be remedied and sooner rather than later. Especially with the cosmetic armours, we should be able to see a preview of them in full with dyable channels. As they are “only cosmetic” then the customer should be able to see the full cosmetic as it will apply.
In this one’s pompous and self important opinion (because most of us are lying when we say our opinions are humble, the humble opinion keeps to itself) the equitable solution would be to add more storage options to the base game something between the reinforced chest and the vault. Like Siptah’s eldarium chests, but have it require fragments of power or Khari steel, Composite obsidian, whatever rarish material one wants. Moving forward, any storage items in the Bazaar with note how many slots they have (which will basically be which storage item they are merely a reskin of).
4 Likes
I don’t have enough trust to agree with this. With that said I do trust the current as of now typing this, the current team working on Conan Exiles and their current ideology when it comes to providing a game with equal footing. They have slipped in some aspects (DLC/Siptah Armors/Weapons) but have made attempts to rectify those. The Bookcase situation is another example of rectifying it. And I get it, something like storage space seems trivial compared to easy to obtain stat gear on DLC items.
But as stated, that’s the current team and the current design philosophy. That can change tomorrow. The developers opinions and desires can be overwritten. This especially becomes more and more possible as players get complacent about simply purchasing options that should otherwise be available in the base game.
This is very much correct. And many players fall into being exploited by these practices. But unfortunately there are some players who will willingly participate in such without regard to their fellow players, not realizing that it will make the game experience suffer in the long run, even for them. I would stress that this also applies to Singleplayer and Plaver Versus Environment.
2 Likes
Trust is an issue, and this one cannot blame you for having it in only tiny rations.
Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
All of this one’s surprises are pleasant.
Realistically, an overhaul of the crafting system could help. Especially with Armour. We are moving into the age of cosmetics. So finish the jump. Armour has a weight-calls and material use tier. This determines it’s base defense and weight, impacted by the craft thrall used.
Each armour has a slot for a stat enhancement. Perhaps two if one has a tier 4 Smith and uses some rare material in crafting.
Likewise whether it has heat/cold or balanced protection is a matter to decide at the craft Bench.
That’s a complete rework, and would naturally be exploited immediately, but then again, everything can be. But this would remove the pay for advantage issue that keeps percolating up.
4 Likes
It is also funny to hear the bookcase described as pay to win. Imagine Conan seeing a bookcase and fleeing from the battle field or an alpha clan despawning everything on seeing the dreaded bookcase appear.
Bookcase - p2w (nerfed)
Siptah - p2w (server transfer disabled)
Funcom life insurance - erm think i will pass 
Message to Funcom. Players do want to support the game and buy nice things to improve their experience. There is really no need to squeeze every last penny out of them using dirty tricks. Just give us all real value for money and then most people will be happy.
1 Like
@Taemien actually explained very well what the issue is and I happen to agree with him on that note. We all focus too much on the “win” part of the P2W, but what Funcom is trying to avoid is giving advantages to those who paid over those who didn’t.
Still, there are tons of ways they could have solved this without this fiasco.
1 Like
I agree with Taemien too. I was just looking at the funny side. I definitely agree though any p2w advantage has no place in this sort of game. I have seen how bad p2w can get as it completely destroys games and for anyone that likes p2w then there is always someone with a bigger wallet ready to pay for their lack of skill.
1 Like
My 2-cents
Cosmetic only is a non-starter for me. I have zero desire for clutter, useless clutter at that, filling my game.
I’d expect a bookshelf to hold books and items in game… and ideally display them. Add a incense box, show in the shelf. add some elixirs, show on the shelf. add a stack of ingots, show on the shelf. run out of shelf space… no more storage. Be better if they were less likely to lose stability and vanish as they are inside the bookshelf storage vs stacked on it.
2 Likes
There are mods capable of this. The basic game will not likely see this feature due to limitations on the lowest common system used to play the game. Some of the recent game functions already push past those limitations.
You cannot be surprised. If you are you must have been sleeping for the past decade. I don’t trust funcom. Some times they do. Most times they don’t. Please realize most things are relative. Even funcom.
2 Likes
Why do you think that is? 
It’s funny in a way, because we’re all talking here and arguing points when the truth is that I don’t think any of us is “stupid” and we’ve seen a lot of this coming from a mile away…
The last time the armor stand topic came up… I was playing a bit of a devil’s advocate since everybody was quoting Dennis on how this would be a huge performance issue with players collecting all the armor in the game and putting them on stands having them rendered and lagging servers… I said it there and then that I just don’t see it… because regardless of the armor a torch will already cause a much more significant performance spike and even now the ToS and getting banned is the only thing stopping people from stuffing a 4x4 building with standing torches and lagging out the whole server. So the tools are already there, it’s not a question of availability.
Likewise people have an army of thralls, a lot of clans with over 100 all of which have armor on as well… Basically I was suspicious that this can’t be the reason since there’s already a million things you can overuse that would cause just as much if not more lag, so what’s another one…
Everybody jumped on me that the devs have no reason to be disingenuous and that this has to be the reason so we stopped there… - this was prior to the release of 3.0 and the bazaar…
I was thinking ever since… that… you know… why would they introduce something - that they themselves acknowledged as one of the “most requested” features ever - for free… when they can sell it to us half a year later once they already pushed the boundaries a bit 
Now ofc this is an exaggeration and I jest (I hope), but still, can’t help but think we’re occasionally taking a tiny step in that direction lately.
3 Likes
We actually did make jokes about this when it first appeared and someone called the curio cabinet “pay to win”…
That the only way that would be pay to win in a direct competition is if you could stuff all those 250 slots full of explosives and use the demon bat to drop it on an enemy base creating the new meta of “curio drops”
But yes, things aren’t always that black and white and we should notice the subtle versions of things as well like @Taemien pointed out since those could be indicative of the direction and what’s to follow.
1 Like
I have thought on this and I can understand and acknowledege your concerns, and I would hate to see this establish a precedent. However, understand that for myself and many others the motive in obtaining such an item is literally this (thankyou LostBrythunian for your insight and civility), not to gain advantages:
But like another member has already pointed out, there is more than one way to skin a cat. For example, rather than essentially nerfing something which customers already aquired in good faith, perhaps we could have added in a new curio as a free content addition, offering the same level of storage capacity. Thereby rendering the one on the BLB as a different skin of an existing item which offers no advantage.
Ps- In the future it would be cool if you could discuss the merits and drawbacks of a feature like a responsible adult. As opposed to going of half cocked like a rampaging toddler, and descending into ad hominem and strawman attacks.
3 Likes
Normally I would, but when it comes to P2W, I’m going to be a bit more aggressive. This is a phenomenon that is literally destroying the industry of the hobby we all enjoy.
In this case you displayed a lack of regard for anything other than singleplayer, when the issue obviously had an effect on the game as a whole. And I did not believe you were naive enough think it didn’t (and I still give the benefit of the doubt in that direction). So I felt it necessary to jar the perception (not just on you but anyone reading the thread) and hold those positions responsible.
I’m not apathetic to the results you experienced of said means I used. But I am not going to allow another’s opinion of me dissuade from this issue. So in the future I will be civil, which is usually my preference. At least until it becomes necessary not to. On the issues of P2W, I am going to stand my ground.
1 Like