You’re talking about people who don’t like purge, but I’m talking about solving the problem of building a server.
And once again - if someone doesn’t like purge, let them go to a PVE server. the same scheme with the destruction of bases, if someone doesn’t like it, they don’t go to the pvp server. Why should it be different with pvec? dont like purges? dont go to pvec. besides, in 6k hours, in 6 years of playing, I have never met people who like to fight and have conflicts (this is pveс after all) and who do not like purges at the same time.
You talk about the return of the old purge as the return of the old problem. I’m talking about the return of the purge mechanics, but improved and without bugs, and without old problems.
you say that people will not stop whining and screaming in the chat - but at the same time they will have to deal with purge and not just sit on the pvec server ruining the lives of other players who want to fight. so they will have to either adapt or go to Pve servers with no purges.
maybe funcome don’t want to do 2 different purges. but the fact is that funcome already spends a lot of effort and time doing a lot of absolutely stupid and unnecessary things. plus u dont need to make any purges for pve servers if they dont like it and dont want it.
about the endgame - the problem is that Conan has already ceased to be a survival game. Funcome has already crippled Conan so much that they have turned it into a mindless sandbox for babys. that’s why we sit and discuss these problems. no surviving…
and abouth endgame. You can simply make bosses and mobs in dungeons that will not be simple punching bags. This is enough for a start. and if you also force funcome to do something like that, and not dump endless bazaars, battle passes, and mediocre stupid dlc, then it will be even better. then the endgame will appear…
I play in 4 public serves 2 pve and 2 pvp i have a clan with 10 people just 3 actives the others moved to ark because thralls nerfs and rules about building i know MANY people from others servers i too most time play ark and know many people changed from conan to ark because they got banned with no warning ,because they cant build and because the rules are no simple i can tell MOST of people just want the rule become more simple funcom shall just copy the rules from games like Rust and Ark They are popular games they arent like myth of empire one dead game with less 2000 players.
Players shall learn to stop cry about others players bases in official servers , official servers are made to play with others players if you dont like others players having big bases or many players more 1 base one example one guy with 12 teleport stones you shall move to other server or move to pvp it is how others games work and work very good since they are popular and problems with land claiming is one small issue in this games
The problem right now and most people play in official pve AND pvp want to be solved are the rules are been used was one weapon most people quitted from conan 1st because of bugs but 2nd because unfair bans with no explain.
Theres no why ban players building in places like crevice , the cave in silkhole , telith island if it is a builded land or in land marks theres no why ban players because he made a little bridge to travel from a place to another one.
If funcom make a survey asking people if they want remove it rules im sure most people will ask it and people will stop cry about others players bases.
I remember sometime ago when many people cryed about people building in world bosses blocking the respawn when funcom stated it is allowed all cry was over and people learned to play.
Again the rules are very simple in other popular games and work very good the problem with landclaiming in others games are very small.
Funcom never will add a land claim flag or banner system because it will kill the game and the bazar turning it in one dead game like myth of empire.
Shall we folllow the rules from one dead game or from one very popular game with very small problem about land claim and that will have sequel?
If someone builds a base of several squares on the map, or spams foundations, or builds up some game areas, then he should be banned.
The fact of the matter is that people playing on official servers play with People and not with their buildings.
There have been cases where people simply built a wall along the southern bank of the river near the starting zone, thereby cutting off new players from the map at all. and it doesn’t matter which server it was. and only after a few years funcme finally make rules and start banning these crazy people.
You can’t separate those two things, they go together. The problem of building a server has to take into account that on any server they could build, there will be a large number of people who would dislike the old purge if FC brought it back. People on every server, no matter what server you build, would complain about it just like they did before.
You seem to be ignoring that if FunCom brought back the old purge it would be on all servers. If people hate the purge it won’t matter what server they go to. No matter what we want, no matter what we hope for, there is no way that FunCom will ever support two different purge systems. Either every server will have the old purge or every server will have the new purge. It will never happen that only PVEC gets the old purge.
Ok now I get it, you’re not talking about the real world, you’re talking about an imaginary world that we would all like to see but will never happen.
But ok, I’ll play along. Yes, if that imaginary scenario ever happened we could come back to this discussion, but in the real world that’s never going to happen. FunCom is never going to roll back the new purge, which they still haven’t finished debugging, only to bring back the old purge that was even more buggy and would require even more time and money to make it work.
I sympathize with your desire, it’s a fun idea to think about, but in the real world FunCom is never going to bring back the old purge and fix it.
You’re making a lot of assumptions about other people suddenly behaving better than they are now, people don’t change like that. The same people who are whining now, the people that you say you don’t understand, would still be whining if the old purge came back. They would not magically have different personalities, they would be the same people and they would behave the same.
If you can convince FunCom to do that, then more power to you. I would be happy to wait in line to shake your hand and congratulate you. But really, it’s not going to happen.
That’s pretty much what it always has been. Almost all survival games are only truly survival games for the first few levels. On the day that Conan was first released in Early Access it was already not really a survival game. There has always been the transition from “survival” to “build and grow” (just like most survival games).
If it was as simple as you think, they would have already done it. This is the same problem that other survival games have too. Again, I sympathize with your desire, but in every game you eventually reach the point where you have pretty much beaten the game.
You might as well stop right there. No one’s going to force FunCom to do anything. If we could force them to do things then all of those “absolutely stupid and unnecessary things” that you were talking about earlier would never have happened. Once again, I sympathize with your desire, but the idea of forcing them to do anything is just wishful thinking.
That’s a lovely thought, I wish you luck at making them do these things.
they won’t do this…they won’t do that …In 6 years of playing this game, I’ve seen fancoms do so many strange, stupid, harmful, and disgustingly amazing (in a bad way) things that I wasn’t so sure that they won’t do anything else…
I don’t need to change whining people. I want them to either go where they are better off or whine but only blame themselves for the server they chose. after all, there were players who even wrote reports against me because I killed them on the pvec server)
Spam foundations and walling are very easy
recognized i agree about banning people walling others players or spamming foundations in the entery map but i disagree about banning one player wall one place where you have many ways to pass or putting just a small numbers foundations to build let me give another example one of servers where i play a guy have one base in “the eye of never close” it is in the j,k 7 in the map he walled both way now because he afraid of people luring tigers to kill he crafters he dont have good armors wepons he still level 56 and because he dont want people passing inside he house more you still can pass climbing the mountain in the side or going to north in another way right now if someone report he , he will be banned what is wrong because he isnt making nothing bad and he isnt preventing people from playing the game.
I too dont care if someone build 2 squares of the map if it wont lag and if dont prevent me from doing anything in the server right now I prefer people having 2 bases one for room and decoration and another one just for craft it dimish the lag when you get near the bases because many time i get much more lagged near smalls bases with all things together one small base with 30 thralls cratf area decoration and all together have much more lag than a large empty base in a square of map.
And just for remember most of lag come from G-portal bad perfomance
Already? Who are you and what have you done to the DeaconElie we know and… sometimes tolerate?
In all seriousness, this thread has been going absolutely nowhere at a staggering pace for quite some time now. I can respect perseverance, but I can also recognize a hopeless cause.
One of the biggest issues is us not knowing just what the rules are.
Oh we have a vague idea but these arguments take place with in the margins.
You read one person saying there is no size limit then see a post by some one that got a suspension for excessive land claim. So by funcoms measure what is excessive? Seems the only way to find out is get there and get a suspension.
And of coarse funcom isn’t going to tell you how your build was excessive. The only lesson to be learned from a funcom suspension is they are arbitrary.
Now as I have said pretty much every open world/sandbox/survival multiplayer game I’ve played; which is quite a few, had some sort of hard coded land claim and no builds. Conan exiles is the only one that pretty much lets you build how you want where you want then bans you for doing such.
Once again here is how you fix the public server Conan build issues.
1: Write very clear rules with multiple examples of violations.
2: If you can get banned for building there make it a no build zone. Too many people have the belief if they can build there it must be ok. Logging in to a suspension is not the way to find out you were wrong.
3: Give people a proper warning, explain how the are violating the ToC.
4: Give people a clear reason/explanation for their suspension.
But this wont happen, it’s too costly and the only people that benefit are us, and you know we don’t count.
You can’t claim that “it works” when your example is a game that is demonstrably failing. I’m not saying you are wrong about those other reasons, each and every one of them might also be true, but even if every reason you have given is true it can still be true that “it’s not working” in MoE.
You have no evidence that the land claim system in MoE works well but that’s not your fault. It’s basically impossible for anyone to have evidence based on a game that is failing for multiple reasons. You have no way of demonstrating that their land maintenance system is not one of those reasons.
This. This should be the starting point for any build game.
Regardless of any other points that people agree or disagree about in this thread, it should always be the responsibility of the game dev to hard code no build zones. No one should ever get banned because of a bad location when the devs could have prevented that from happening.
I mean, yes, that’s a fair point. There’s always a tiny possibility that they’ll do something you want, even if it’s only a tiny, tiny, tiny possibility. And again, if you can convince them to do so then I’ll be the first in line to shake your hand. I don’t think it’s realistic, but if you can make FC do something then more power to you.
Well that’s the point, they’re not going to what you want unless they change. It’s axiomatic, they’re not going to change therefore they’re not going to do what you want.
It may not seem like it to you but I’m on your side here. I sympathize with what you want, but the people you are complaining about would still have the same personalities and attitudes even if FC changed the game. If you can’t change the whining people then they’re not going to make different decisions, they’re not going to blame themselves, they’re not going to choose a different server, they would just continue doing what they’re doing.
Which is pretty terrible. I agree it would be better if they went somewhere else, but they wouldn’t even if the old purge was brought back, their personalities and attitudes would still be the same. If you can’t change their attitudes then you can’t get them to change their behavior. That’s the problem with people in general, they always do what they want to, not what you want them to do.
Yes, I agree. No one should get banned in Conan just for building somewhere they’re allowed to build. The rules currently state as long as you don’t block discovery of a POI, it’s not considered an infraction. Whether that is true (and people’s admittedly self-reporting seems to indicate it’s not) remains to be verified.
But we should not just suddenly make all these places no-build zones, out of respect for ALL players.
Private servers have the standard setting, or “can build anywhere” setting which includes building in the middle of NPC camps like Sepermaru and New Asagarth. The latter isn’t something that I have seen used often, if at all. Most people don’t want entire NPC camps despawned.
If additional no-build spots need to be added around POI, there should be a 3rd setting, somewhere in between the two we have no.
Current build exclusion zones
Current build exclusion zones + POI build exclusion zones
No exclusions
Official servers could be set to the middle setting, so the rules are more clear. Private servers can choose any of the three; if they like how it works now, keep it (maybe they don’t care about POI but do care about despawning NPCs). If they want to be more restrictive though, they could also use the middle setting.
This also follows the way drop on death and changes to that were implemented in the last age where, instead of just suddenly making a change to how inventory drop worked, an additional setting was added to allow private servers to still have some control over their player experience.
I think there is a few reasons why they don’t want to take that avenue. Its very rare that the developers will put in a feature designed around their servers.
The main one is the effort has very little return on investment. The FC servers make up a smaller percentage of the total playerbase. In fact we are far more likely to see features and settings that they don’t use on their servers (like Dynamic Building Damage).
But the other, is I don’t even think they would use such a setting. And the reason being is from an admin point of view, its better for players to ask themselves, “can I build here?” Rather than assuming every area they -can- build in is fine. If a player for example builds in an area because they could, and the POIs are all blocked, but they build in a way, or block a means of travel, and get action. They’re going to complain that there was no build zone that prevented them. The idea is to get most players to ask the question “would building here cause an issue?” And then the response is, “if you have to ask, its probably not a good idea.” And then they’ll find a place that is less ambiguous. The cynics will complain every square inch of the map is ambiguous. But as we know, cynics are cynics.
Lets do a hypothetical. There is two regions of the map, there is two avenues that lead to both without needing climbing gear. A clan builds in one, basically blocking it off. Under many here, they would say that its fine since the other is still free.
Now we have a second clan who builds in the second one, unaware at the time of building, or even checked and didn’t see the other as they started building after checking. Both avenues are blocked. Who’s in trouble? Both did so thinking the other side wasn’t blocked. Someone has to lose their stuff, and the way it works is an admin demo of the entire clan (since it has to be done via a command that executes on server reboots, admins don’t login to active servers, so regular shift-del doesn’t work).
But therein lies the issue, who gets to decide what an avenue is? Something you can ride a horse though? Something you can squeeze through on foot? Something you can climb through with basic stamina? What about sorcerers, maybe they can fly… or what if they can’t and they have limited stamina to climb with? If someone can climb around using climbing gear… well what happens when they die on the otherside and need a naked run to get their stuff back?
I do remember having to deal with these situations while moderating servers in the past. I always found it best to just blanket statement don’t build there, even if you could. Especially with larger populations where doing case by case becomes impractical. When you have less than a dozen clans running around you don’t have much issue and can even allow full blockage but ‘keep a door open/unlocked’. But when you manage a population of a few thousand over many servers. That’s in the impractical territory.
I’m not personally opposed to a server setting like this. But I don’t think its going to be worth the effort. Going in and measuring out zones for the 100+ locations on Exiled Lands and then testing them would be quite tedious. And a bit inconvenient to those built near them but don’t block them in anyway.
Oh, I don’t think you’re incorrect. It still leaves wiggle room, as you said. And I do think it could easily become “give an inch, take a mile” (get the devs to block POI, then people ask what about passages, then people want…insert request here).
I was just saying IF they were to block POI (as a low-hanging fruit kind of option since it has a map marker), I’d like to see them do it with more consideration than just added to what we currently have as no build zone.
I agree that it’s rare, I’m arguing that it should not be rare, rather it should be common. Beyond that, I’m arguing that it makes financial sense affecting the bottom line of the game, this is not just a feelings issue.
Only if a person has a short-sighted view of how the investment and the return work.
Investment - for any given location, road, POI, block of land, etc., however you want to define it, you only spend the money one time for a dev to mark that location as a “no build” location and for it to be tested. That costs some amount of time & money up front, during the creation of the product.
Return - in exchange for that up-front investment, the return is that this reduces the time/expense of support going forward - a savings they continue to realize on a daily basis for years. It’s thousands and thousands of tickets, admin interventions, bans, dev wipes that never need to happen over the lifetime of the game.
Even if development time costs 10 times as much as support time, or even 20 times as much as support time, the developer still comes out ahead in the long run by spending dev/test time to designate no-build zones during the development process. The problem is that most company leaders (whether it’s the C-Suite, the project manager, the hands-on devs, etc.) don’t see or truly understand the back-end costs associated with support going forward.
This is true in all software development, not just games. For those of use who are in IT (and especially people with operations experience) we see the ongoing costs of supporting problems that could have been avoided by more dev time (and better logic) during the development process. None of this is an insult to developers or their skills, it’s a matter of company priorities. I’ve been in plenty of meetings where someone will point out problems with a product that could be resolved with development time and someone in the room will respond with comments like, “Just have the operations folks work that out on a case-by-case basis”, because they don’t understand the hidden costs of that approach. And if you think about it, that is fundamentally what computers are for, to do that repetitive tasks that happen hundreds or thousands of times, over and over, as time goes by. Every hour of dev time is worth many hours of support time.
If the game company has a location where they don’t want people to build, then that game company will save themselves a lot of time & money over the life of their game by reducing support tickets and support costs, not to mention improving their good will with their players, by designating it as a no-build location.
When discussing return on investment, every company gets a much better return by programming anything that happens repeatedly over the lifetime of their product rather than having the support team do it over and over and over again.
Anyone who thinks that investing in creating no-build zones is somehow lacking a return on that investment doesn’t understand just how big that return will be.
And since official servers are an expense, development activity that reduces the ongoing expenses associated with official servers is a good idea.
Agreed. And in the interest of thorough examination, any no-build feature that is added to the game also needs to have a corresponding setting that unofficial/private servers can use to turn off that feature. But even knowing that a no-build zone only affects the official servers, it still offers a better return-on-investment than many people might think it does.
The vast majority of players will never ask themselves “can I build here?” or “Should I build here?” until after they get sanctioned by the devs. And if that sanction is a full wipe or even worse a ban, then the only result of that happening is making players unsatisfied with the product and the company, there is no upside to this happening. There is nothing good about putting players in a no-win scenario where they only find out about their mistakes by getting wiped or banned.
That’s exactly what players should be able to assume, that if they can build then it’s fine. People want to enjoy a game as form of entertainment. It should not be some bizarre form of ongoing ethics exam in which the penalty for mistakes is losing the results hours and hours of game time. Most people want to be able to assume that if they can build somewhere then it’s fine, and they’re right, that’s what they should be able to assume.
It’s true that no system is perfect, even with a really good design for no-build zones there will be grey areas and edge cases. But that doesn’t negate the value of no-build zones. If FC got rid of many, many support tickets related to building and related to reducing wipes and bans by doing a better job with no-build zones that’s better for everyone in the long run. Devs, support, players, all benefit. Not to mention the reputation of the game benefiting which has the potential for additional financial benefits.
It’s a nice idea, but it’s a pipe dream, that’s not how human nature works. That idea will never come to fruition (in any game, not just Conan).
You’re ignoring the portion of people who believe it’s better to get forgiveness than permission. In addition to honest, ethical players every game also has dishonest, unethical players, and those players will always try to do things that they’re not supposed to do (even when they know they’re not supposed to) and every time that happens it causes support tickets to be created and support time to be wasted on a problem that could have been prevented by a no-build area.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Likewise, an ounce of dev time creating no-build zones is worth a pound of support time answering the non-stop stream of support tickets that will continue over the lifetime of game.
The more ambiguity there is, the more often unethical and selfish people will build in areas that honest, ethical people would not. No-build zones help to prevent that from happening. Again, no system is perfect, but it dishonest, unethical people can be prevented from building in ambiguous areas then that benefits all of the honest, ethical players as well as reducing support costs.
Who decides what an avenue is? The devs, and they designate those avenues as no-build zones. It might be a path only 2 tiles wide winding between a couple of hills, or it might be an 8 tile wide avenue through the middle of an abandoned city.
No-build zones don’t have to be huge, and they don’t have to be just a square or a circle. There’s nothing bad or wrong about designating access routes as no-build zones. The only people who won’t like that are people who want to block access.
The bigger a game is, the more servers it has, the more players it has, the more important it is for the company to do a good job of building logic into the game that prevents players from doing things that would get them wiped or banned. If a problem can be prevented by dev time, that’s always a better solution than addressing it over and over again with support time.
It’s pretty much too late for Conan, which is in the maintenance phase of its lifecycle, but any new game that’s like Conan would benefit from doing a better job of designating no-build zones. The return on investment is much larger than most people understand.
It would be much less tedious (and less expensive) than the ongoing stream of support tickets that are created over the lifetime of the game.
Every hour of dev/test time that’s spent on preventing future problems with no-build zones is an investment with great returns.
Im good informed since i played it sht
And i can tell again IT WONT WORKED
And next time you compare or give ideias about rules try use one game where it REALLY work and are popular like minecraft ark rust palworld and some others.
