Clans. Do we really need this feature?

I keep coming back to this and I think we don’t really need this feature. We could establish personal alliances with other players and be done with the idea of clan in general. I’m thinking these would be the following

1)Default-neutral. Thralls will defend while attacked.
2)Enemy. Thralls AOS
3)Ally. Thralls will not attack at all and hold friendly status (less damage). No access to placeables or doors
4)Loyalty. Thralls on friendly status. Access of all storage and doors minus vault

Vault can only be accessed by player. Only 1 vault per player and it is indestructible. Obtained at level 60 and free to place. Hand crafted.

5 Likes

I have no actual problem with the clan system although i would prefer the option of clan leader to be for more than one person.
But i like the privacy an alliance can give and i respect your desire.
Personally i have more pleasant experience than bad with the clan system so i have nothing against it. Then again loss is intriguing for me, it gives me reasons to play and share joy.
For once more i will beg you to join. There are people out there that respect privacy no matter who the established leader is. We have no leaders we are all soldiers, friends.
For the vault thing is too huge for my taste. We could lock chests with code numbers. But if you don’t trust your teammate, it’s better not to play together.

2 Likes

Something tells me all of this would be difficult to recode after their failure to implement alliances as they’d hoped. I’d say leave clans be. I would still like a chance to create alliances though… and maybe open containers for PVE use. It would be nice to donate stuff to others without having to drop it all on the ground—or allow people to come and go as they please. Hopefully we’ll at least get vendors at some point.

Overcomplicated and unintuitive idea. Not to mention difficulties implemetning such system.

1 Like

Very bad idea

We need the clan feature to play together and it is a good feature the only thing i miss about it is the shared exp when playing together and some type of bonus damage.

Queue unraidable bases on PVP.

Yep but everyone has one so no one is at a complete wipe.

The question is what is the point of pvp? Is it to encourage active fighting or is it to just wipe bases. This would remove the conflict and the server wipers would only get so far and deny them a victory.

1 Like

LOOL like @Kikigirl I see unraidable bases aplenty lol

My PVP brain immediately begins scanning my mental Exiled Lands map for base locations with front entry only that I can simply block with said indestructible vault and that’s that. Anything behind it is safe lol.

Not to mention the exploits that would be possible! Under meshers rejoice!

Any indestructible object in the game, looking at you, coin pile immediately becomes a wall or ceiling/floor for PVP. If incense was indestructible, you can bet PVPers would place 2k of them pixel to pixel for an indestructible floor to a ceiling base, etc.

Rule 1: NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE PATIENCE AND GENIUS OF A PVP BUILDER.

1 Like

Keyhole. Top of South Aqueduct.

Let’s imagine and a player lives out of a vault instead or the map is littered with vaults of alts.

Like i said in the past. The game needs a bank. Every player would have the ability to stockpile the bank and not body vaults. The area of the bank could be pvp safe and the player could teleport from the bank to his base but not the other way around.
And yes i know that people would find refuge in the bank, for this reason a player should be able to interact with the bank only once per day and not more than a quarter of hour!
And again i know that people will build around Sepermeru and try to scout the pvp safe area for killing and stealing the others who try to reach the bank and deposit. But with the sorcery benefits a player can slip easier now, other than that, it’s a dangerous game and it should remain this way.
But the bank system would help a lot, especially on the hacking issue pc has.
Think of it!

Simplest, easiest, and most beneficial change for PVP:

Dynamic Building Damage.

There are so, so many great PVP fighters who can’t play official PVP servers solely because they don’t have the time to commit to being online every single day for five hours lest they lose everything. PVP would come ALIVE with that one simple obvious change.

Yes it would have issues like people hoarding their loot in alt account bases and whatnot but that is hardly different than the under mesh alt bases they’re hiding it in now. :woman_shrugging: Half the cheating wouldn’t need to take place.

A lot of convoluted ideas to bank this and that all boils down to the same thing anyway.

1 Like

Without arguing that this would help and would be in some parts better than raid off, my experience from private pve servers was that when a clan was bullying this server, nobody was logging in on pvp hours, except the ones that has nothing to loose

For PVP.
Remove any capability or means of storage.
Armor limited to what is worn. (lootable)
Weapons, food, first aid limited to the skill slots. (lootable)
Maximize environmental effects.
No warning ambush predators.

Damage settings to “kill or be killed” 1 shot / 1 hit. (whoever/whatever makes the first critical hit).
No auto targeting.
Friendly Fire Enabled.

No big builds. No fortresses. No land claim.

No “meta”.

1 Like

I would love to play this way except this…

1 shots are no fun, or at least one side fun only. Then again like Dennis said, the players move very fast and attack even faster since most of the attacks you’ll see on a multi person pvp fight are speed attack and dodge.
If you don’t have to build or grind for explosives, the map is too big and probably it will be absolute boredom.
But all these are speculations, if a moder can create a mod with these mechanisms, the pc pvp union can always try and give feedback.

1 Like

@stelagel
No doubt the 1 shot / 1 hit is brutal. (especially if it’s a critical hit).
I’ve tested this out myself and paid the price for being careless. lol.
However, it did raise my awareness level.
It would make for bow use more tactical and advantageous where the situation favors it. (That’s where I was careless and didn’t see it coming).

1 Like

I believe the greatest mistake of sprint attacks is that the character can keep balance. At the time they implement sprint attacks they should add risk at the same time of loosing balance and fall. I know it’s a game and people should do magical things, but this mechanism costed lots of pvp battle change and unnecessary nerfs, that pulled away many players.
It’s funny that the pvp community never actually protested for this matter.

1 Like

Physics.
A disadvantage to sprint should be momentum. (Can’t stop on a dime and can cause a player to run into things that can be … unpleasant and consequential.
That’s where a pike stance would benefit or a javelin with a shield or a short sword and shield.
It’s knowing when to take the stance at the right second.

Indeed, if we could simply trip a sprinter … that would make them so vulnerable.

1 Like

This, sir, is Conan Exiles, where to even have armor or weapons you literally need storage, benches, items, resources lol… Like do you have not even the most basic rudimentary understanding of Conan?

“By golly just spawn in the desert with a kit and have at it” says he

I have always said to increase stamina cost of all attacks, then give a refund to stamina for damage to enemy. IE, sprint attack uses 100 stamina, but connect on enemey recieve 50 back immediately. So misses have a true con, making spamming a less effecient option.

1 Like

Fine for PC… Console on the other hand not so much lol… You can directly hit a guy on your screen and on his, you’re five feet away swinging like you’re blind.