More than one type per clan seems to lead to spam.
How so? Even with one religion it still can be spam.
Though I wish the description given when choosing meant a thing.
3 Likes
Well thereās different weapons and armor with various altars and anyone wanting to spam has other alternatives.
5 Likes
How about one per individual? If you are in a clan then 4 members equals 4 altars? Not sure if equality means justice.
I think it is about land claims rather than for tokens.
2 Likes
We generally have no more than 2 or 3 never duplicates. That would not be necessary.
1 Like
Yes, we need them. I always make one shrine for each religion, because they all have items I want to use. And no, it doesnāt lead to spam. Maybe on PVP servers for some weird reason that I donāt know about because I donāt play on those servers, but on PVE(-C) servers the reasons for overbuilding have nothing to do with shrines.
5 Likes
I donāt think limiting alters is the right way to go, at least not without a complete overhaul of the religion system.
As it stands in my eyes itās really just a unique crafting station, and I wouldnāt support only allowing one of any other crafting station.
4 Likes
When youāre building defensively, itās wise to have temples that cover your entire base. My ops base is large enough to need two bubbles. Also, I like the Berserker Draught, I need Set Masks, arrows and potions, and I need Yog Meat.
4 Likes
Oh, so thatās what this āshrines cause spamā idea is all about? People build shrines to cover their bases with bubbles on PVP servers, so we need to restrict shrines?
Good grief, Iām so tired of thisā¦
5 Likes
I meant one person could have one of each instead of many of one.
1 Like
People will spam the t1 alters because they are pretty cheap, have high health, and (most importantly) have a high land claim radius. Having a few for bubble protection is not really a big deal. Iāve raided bases with 75-100 alters surrounding it as land claim.
Edit:
Not my pic, but representative of the tactic
3 Likes
If there is going to be a limit, I would want three of each, sometimes the t1 looks better than the t3 for certain builds and a t2 may fit in better with the decor.
Also, I want to pick them up and replace them again ājust rightā at anytime.
3 Likes
That sounds incredibly annoying to encounter. Also somewhat ironic, since the reason altars have a large landclaim (as I understand it) was to protect PVP from people being able to place a bunch of altars close together. Sadly, thatās often going to be the case with a lot of fixes - we know now the power of crowd-sourcing and a player base is always going to have a chance to come up with things that a group of devs may never have considered, simply because of the number of minds in each group.
I can certainly understand calls for a limit of one of each altar per person - though I would add that this should be possible to toggle on/off for private servers and singleplayer - some builds benefit aesthetically from more than one altar of the same type, so completely removing the option would be something I would oppose. As always, player/server choice for these things seems important to include.
2 Likes
Thank you for explaining. My opinion remains the same: Iām tired of proposals to slap a limit on this or that instead of proposals that solve the actual problem.
Note that neither this opinion nor the rest of this post are directed at you specifically.
Are people spamming T1 shrines because they have high health and a high claim radius? Then letās suggest nerfing the T1 shrine health and claim radius. Not to limit them to one per clan or one per person or whatever.
I mean, seriously, what the hell?
Again, @DanQuixote, donāt take this as an attack on you, but can you explain why you can understand calls for this limit? I can understand calling for limits if solving the underlying problem is complicated or takes too much effort, but this?
I apologize for the general tone of my post, but Iāve been growing more and more frustrated with the forums. There have just been way too many suggestions that would be horrible for PVE, but theyāre āabsolutely necessary because PVP is dead/dyingā, and at this point Iām out of sympathy.
8 Likes
I donāt think limiting alters is a reasonable solution to this problem either. If not altars itās something else. Land claim/spam is the issue here. Limiting PVE because PVPers abuse an efficiency is lazy and bad balancing.
We should seek out and advocate for cures for the sickness not itās symptoms.
Also, I largely ignore anything here that has āx killed CEā or āis deadā. I find them to be generally unhelpful and usually stemming from emotion rather than reason.
5 Likes
No worries, I donāt see it as an attack at all - nice to disagree with you, even slightly for a change 
. I guess I wasnāt clear enough in the way I stated it (trying to stop posting extremely long posts that no one would want to read, so I probably edited the thought too far). I meant that I understand where the desire is coming from - āx is a problem, therefore remove xā - I didnāt mean that I support it, just that Iāve given up trying to figure out what is or isnāt best for PVP and focus now on protecting PVE/singleplayer interests (hence the suggestion of a toggle).
You are entirely correct that āremove xā is the most reductive way to find a solution to an issue that is essentially player created. But I also feel like it is an understandable thing for people to call for if they canāt come up with another alternative. If reducing the radius had already been tried and rejected (which was my understanding - but I may be wrong), and expanding the radius has led to it being used for claim spam, then I lack another good alternative (quite possibly because I havenāt put much thought into it - itās not a problem I was even aware of till I saw this thread). So I can understand someone that is being affected by it calling for that solution if they too canāt see another - understand the call, even if I donāt support it unmodified.
If shrinking the claim radius isnāt something that would cause a whole different problem, then I certainly agree that seems preferable (I use LBPR to do exactly that in my own game, so that I can put temples where I want them for my build, not be forced to spread them further apart). If thereās another, proactive rather than reductive, solution someone can come up with then that could be better too. If crowd-sourcing can create the problem, then maybe it can create the solution as well.
2 Likes
Youāre damned if you do and damned if you donāt 
At any rate, sorry for misunderstanding your intentions 
I donāt know for sure, but I think it hasnāt been tried and rejected. For all the ungodly time I spend on these forums, this is the first time Iāve seen anyone even bring up the problem. And there seems to be no valid reason to give shrines a disproportionately large claim area.
2 Likes
My understanding was that the radius was once small and had been enlarged to stop some sort of PVP problem - no idea where I got that from, so quite possibly dreamed itā¦ (And if I dreamed it, thatās probably not a good basis for not trying itā¦)
2 Likes
Why use altars for land claim when there are battle standards that could do the same? Would that be visually acceptable in pve/c?
Your assertion seems to hold, actually, despite the OPās change of tone. This isnāt about landclaim spam, itās specifically about limiting the number of things I can build as an honest player. This is why I didnāt bring up the claim radius issue ā if we limit people to one temple per kind per player, theyāll still do the spanning claims, but with all the temples.
1 Like