make the count how many thralls you need in a base to have all the options opened.
do that yourself. and let me know how many you neeed.
Once again you don’t NEED them, you WANT them.
I’ve never had the NEED to get all those different types of smiths.
Plying styles, you only need a blacksmith, a tanner, an armorer, ect.
well you really dont need them tbh. its not mandatory to have one, not even 1!
in fact they could remove all thralls and you could still play the game…
but i think they need to think that people like options available, and in any large clan enviroment i think it is safe to assume that it is good to have those options.
So uhh, can anyone confirm if maybe the crafter’s bonuses all apply when crafting or if you have to pick one bonus? It’d be sort of funny if it all applied, but i imagine they thought of that.
If not…
Then let the Age of Armorers begin!
This urge to remove features used by others seems at odds with your response to people suggesting removing elements that you want…
i know… irony on my end my friend. they are turning this game into something else. everything is a low hanging fruit. no challenges, and now this non sense of setltement system.
i watched waks, and funny enough his base was deserted, at some point all of his thralls went to a tavern and all there, benches empty , there was nothing really about bringing life to his base…
@Wak4863 will not let me lie.
issues with thralls standing on tables, (not sitting) crafters getting lost , thralls following running back to base and teleporting to player to run back to base, and a large ETC.
i was not wrong when i said this will bring issues, and a lot of problems, unnecesary problems because crafters where just working fine…
if they want to keep i t , i will advice to allow benches to receive inventory thralls, (even if they are just cosmetic , (ie, not adding any bonuses) and leave the roaming ones do it. otherwise, this is not looking good. ont he contrary.
I won’t deny, the ‘empty base’ effect worries me a bit. Hopefully it may just be a matter of learning to build in new ways. You know I’m also concerned with Funcom’s ability to implement new stuff, but I don’t have time for Public Beta this month so I’ll just have to wait and see how things go at release.
Side thought - and feel free to ignore this if it really doesn’t appeal -
I can understand the boredom that can develop for veteran players; we’ve done everything many times over. But I can highly recommend starting a new character every once in a while. It can be a wrench to walk away from everything that you have built up, but once I do start a new character it can also be quite freeing. What I normally do (as a ‘safety net’) is back up the old save, so that I will be able to go back to it later if I want to (I just never actually do go back). Maybe you could get the same effect by continuing to refresh your main playthrough, so you don’t lose anything, but just try a new character for a while? I don’t know - it helps me with boredom, maybe it could work for you as well.
i appreciate your advice , thanks,
but i kinda like the chaos of multiplayer haha, so its hard for me to think play in SP, when i have been playing with my friends since 2018,
i just hope funcom can undertand that there is no need to force cosmetic on people this feature should be opt in,. some will opt out, some will fully opt in, and other like me in my perfect world i would just have the previous but add a few thralls to roam my base, leave my outposts with thralls in their benches,
i would like to have full control on what moves and how, exactly as i do with emotes, on my thralls,
1 Like
It sounds to me you’re just bored of the game, and that’s fine. I’d suggest taking a break, not asking the game to change what it is to fit what you want it to become.
Same as before, to get thralls.
Seens a bit paradoxical to say no one will have thralls because they have too many thralls.
Well in a way, they are limiting it. By limiting the number of thralls you can have it encourages you to use that limit more wisely. Spreading out and having a full copy of every kind of thrall in half a dozen outposts was already inefficient for organization, now it’s just doubly inefficient. Have your main crafting hub, like you would have had before, have a purge base, and have a wheel outpost. If you plan right, you could even consolidate some of these together. Just need to think more about logistics than before. It’s a hurdle, an annoying one to be fair but far from a “game killer”.
Hard disagree. You don’t use legendaries???
Sounds again like you’re just bored. No one was out there building a second and third fully stocked base except for maybe pvpers but that’s a whole other discussion.
Again, sounds like you’re just bored. You could say the same about virtually any content in the game. And the only need it to entertain you for a few months, because there’s a new update in a few months. It’s not like this is the final time they’re ever adding anything to the game ever again.
By default, a solo player can have sixty-five followers. Idk about you but I’ve never hit that cap, most times I don’t even hit half that. Again, if you’re efficient with what you’ve got, you should be fine. Cull the ineffective thralls, don’t sit on subpar followers just to bloat the cap. Make them matter, quality over quantity. A dozen well geared, levelled and fed berserkers will be vastly more effective at purge defense than 30 Shemite Exile IIs in rags.
Optimize, organize and you’ll be fine. Or again if you are burnt out of the game that’s fine, take a break and come back to it another time.
2 Likes
The topic of the thread is thrall hunting, so that’s what I’m talking about. As for the game in general, my answer remains the same: no, I’m not “happy” that it’s not challenging, but that doesn’t mean that adding RNG grind will make it challenging. It won’t.
Just because you have some numbers that illustrate how you play, it doesn’t mean your way of playing has to be forced on everyone else. That’s what makes your claim an opinion, rather than a fact. You’re saying “there will be a lot of deserted settlements and outposts” because you’re extrapolating that from your own preferred play style and generalizing it to everyone.
See, this is exactly what I meant. This is how you play. Those numbers represent how you prefer to build and how you prefer to staff your builds.
Before I let my base decay, my numbers were quite different. I used to have a lot more than merely 18 crafters in my main base.
The upcoming change will allow me to have fewer than what I used to have. I estimate I’ll need more or less 16 crafters (without counting any priests).
Again, that’s how you see it. Not everyone plays like that right now. And not everyone will stay committed to playing like that.
Sure. And there’s nothing stopping you from enjoying the building system and living in your creation. Not even on official servers, where we have to deal with the thrall cap.
What will change is the ability to have a fully-staffed base for every member of the clan. Some clans will adapt, others will disband.
One way to adapt is to specialize: Alice’s base is where you go to craft the best armor and weapons, Bob’s base is where you go to get food, Charlie is in charge of the outpost where we catch and break thralls, and Debbie does dark sorcery.
Again, not everyone will like that. Some people will do that, others will adapt in different ways, and some will just disband their clans or move to a private server.
And that’s all okay, because the point you seem to be missing consistently is that not everyone has to play the same way.
You don’t like anything about the new system? That’s okay, it’s your opinion. But don’t try to force that opinion on everyone else. Feel free to complain, but don’t propose suggestions that force your complaints on me, and don’t expect everyone to agree with your opinion 
1 Like
Randomness has a place in game design. It’s a tool in the game designer’s toolbox. But in Funcom’s toolbox, it’s not just a tool, it’s the golden fuсking hammer.
Hell, I would settle for the devs changing how RNG is used, to give people at least an illusion of greater agency. A degree of control a bit higher than the mindless slot-machine mechanics.
No, it really, really isn’t. RNG is not a challenge. If there is no other challenge in the game, then there is no challenge in the game at all.
i saw wak stream today, he has a much different play style than me, and his base was deserted, eveyrone decide to go to the nearby bar, and they stayed there, bench did had the element of bonuses given but thralls were absent. so it does not only affect my game play,
ok so the changes are good for anyone who does not play as i am?
the difference is back then those thralls did not affected your thrall spots, now they do. …
i can tell by how builds are made in at least 2 official servers that i play on, trust me i am not alone. but let me ask you, why is funcom forcing people to drop they play style over a cosmetic change? (well obviously they can , its their game… yet i can disagree with a change, (not like it matters much right? lol)
in the past we could choose how to build our own bases, now it seems we need to adapt over a forced change. that makes no sense, because it affects players freedom (sandbox part) as long as i keep within the limits of the TOS, i should be able to do as i please, this change forces me to play the game in a different way, to adapt (as you said) … i know i am on the loosing side … but what am i supposed to do? keep silence? not my style.
you havent stopped with the RNG slot machine, because you dont like it. and that i do respect it.
see some people do like RNG…some are ok, i am to a limited extent, that does not mean anyone is wrong … same principle applies codemage with the settlement system…the same.
it does loooks like that with this system we must play in certain way, otherwise , it wont work if we do not adapt… last time i check i am not forcing your opinion , trust me @codemage, i am usually share your opinions, i might disagree with others, but i do have a lot of respect for yours,
never my intention, i do hope you understand that there are likeminded people seeing at this problem as me. other do disagree that is fine. this is a discussion board afterall.
you know, my proposal goes more into a middle ground that could please more people than it currently is.
the wandering part if purely cosmetic, that change will force people to play in certain way, going into a solution that allows player FULL control over how the settelemt you build works (how can anyone complaint with something that give control to players?) how can someone be against that? escapes me, but sure., people has freedom to choose their poison. it will be absolutely amazing, if we can choose how to run our settlements, to have full control over it.
Funny after watching wak stream for several hours, i can say the following, i was RIGHT this change is coming with a lot of troubles, i did went to testlive, and did notice issues , there are also funny reports on testlive, like thralls dying without any reason (yet they were still fulfilling their needs, while been… KO, performance issues, pathing issues, blocking issues, and a lot of problems with this… (this lines above has nothing to do with my play style, its BIG bugs)
i do resist the idea that in order to have my thralls serving my base i need to build in “certain way” this is a system that is based on a broken foundation, (check the tavern issuies still unresolved)
I haven’t tried the Companion quests just yet. Might tinker with that tomorrow. But I suspect its not something that can be knocked out in about 5-10 minutes.
When going out to nab some T4 crafters, since the new settlement system is really making me want to have the proficiencies (seeing the slots open gets the completionist in me to want to fill them), I’m going to be running into T4 fighters as normal.
I’m not going to turn my nose up at these. I’m still going to want to knock them out and then use them for purge defense or other uses (to easily replace others lost or use them as Zombies). But the companion system is great as we get to use it for… what its named for, companions. Followers that I expect to use as my primary following thrall into combat.
Will they eventually replace all other T4 thralls for their purpose? Sure, if I’m on a several hundred hour character. But I learned years ago if you sit on the same character for over 200 hours, the game gets incredibly stale. Like Jimbo said, the only guy really complaining about the new system seems utterly bored with the game. There’s nothing FC can do except release a new game for them. There’s 10s of thousands of games on Steam they could play to fix that issue.
They’re asking for FC to update the game in a very specific way to fit their very specific playstyle, layout, organization, and doctrine. Which is impossible, and even if FC tried to do what they want, the boredom would kick in and they’d hate it anyway. Literally any change will be bad for them, no change will be bad for them. Everything is bad for them, period. Its time for them to realize Conan Exiles isn’t their game anymore and take an extended break, hiatus, or migrate entirely from it.
@Hansel You are entirely correct that the game will be entirely a horrible and absolutely terrible experience for you when the game updates. I retract my earlier statement about you trying the update. Don’t. Stay away from it. Don’t download the beta, don’t check on it. Don’t even read about it. Get whatever you have planned for Conan Exiles done before it goes live. The game will be something you cannot tolerate, have fun with, nor have anything but a negative experience. Don’t put yourself through that torture. FC isn’t going to listen to you, they’ve double and tripled down on the upcoming changes. Prepare to uninstall and move on from the game when the patch goes live. Your clanmates are likely to leave you alone if you stick around as well.
1 Like
read again , what i want is freedom, to use the system anyway any player wants.
you should ignore me, this is my last response to you, as i am tired of reading your BS, i will be fantastic to not read you ever again.
PSA for Companion quests, they have something of a built in cool down timer between quests.
No blitzing them.
This was also mentioned in the teaser devstream, if this one recalls correctly.
2 Likes
i think you might be right my friend.
it will be good to undertand those timers, so people do not believe its bugged, some people are starting to think it is.
1 Like
I’m not going to base my arguments solely on what a content creator says. No offense to Wak or any other content creator, but their incentive is to report and describe the changes. That’s is useful for certain things, like getting informed before trying the content yourself, but it doesn’t replace playing.
To put it more bluntly, if Wak found some real problems with the system, I’ll thank him for that and support suggestions on how to improve it, but I won’t take his videos as an argument about how people will play on official servers. It’s kinda like taking dating advice from Henry Cavill. Or like watching “Friends”, and thinking that I could be unemployed and afford a huge apartment in West Village NYC.
Unlike you, I’m not going to pretend to speak for everyone else. I know the changes will be good for people who play like me. And they’ll be good for people who wanted the living settlements and are willing to adapt to the new system.
I never came close to the limit before, I won’t come close now. What will improve is that I won’t have to hunt for a buttload of T4s to place in each and every one of my workstations. I won’t need 8 T4 smelters, I won’t need 4 T4 blacksmiths, I won’t need several cooks and alchemists, etc.
People who were close to the limit before will have to decide how to adapt.
Because it’s not a cosmetic change. You keep calling it cosmetic, but your insistence doesn’t make it cosmetic.
It’s a fundamental change in the system, and it brings something people were asking for.
Welcome to the live service games. If you want game that will never change, you’ll have to avoid those.
Personally, there are things I don’t like about live service games, but I’m realistic enough to accept that I made an informed decision to play one. 
No, of course not. Like I keep saying, feel free to complain about it. I respect your right to have an opinion. Just don’t expect me to agree just because you insist.
And don’t propose changes like “Funcom should just limit each clan to one base”, because that’s where you cross the line into wanting to force your own play style on everyone else. 
Some people like salt. That doesn’t mean that I want to eat a steak with 4 cups of salt dumped on top of it.
And yeah, people who think that lazy use of RNG is “challenging” are, in fact, wrong. There are books on game design, written by people with years of experience, people who have been credited with game design on some famously beloved and successful games. Those people agree with me: RNG is just one tool in the toolbox and should be used carefully and sparingly.
Okay, just to make sure I’m not running into a language barrier: you do understand the difference between “everyone has to play the same way” and “there are some ways you can’t play anymore”?
If my grocery store stops carrying rosemary-olive bread, I’m not going to say “You’re forcing us all to eat sourdough!”
I was referring specifically to this:
The rest of our argument is a disagreement of opinions, but that? That was crossing the line into “well, if I can’t have my fun my way, no one else should have fun their way”.
Um, don’t get offended, but what proposal? I’ve gone over your previous posts in this thread, and I don’t see anything proposed. I see complaints about the new system, but no proposal.
Again, what proposal are we talking about? What solution gives players control?
that was me being ironic @CodeMage really , i am not one that likes to be limited, apologies if my message was badly constructre.
i might not have posted then in this thread, but please allow me to dig out those and quote them here.
but in the meantime, to sum it up.
i see two ways :
-
allow thralls as inventory items, and allow them to be part of the system, as i player i could decide if i want my thralls deployed or not. deploying htem means you need far less thralls and they can provide bonuses to all benches that are compatible with their profession… the old system will still need the thrall as inventory item but they will not move, and stay there. (this will allow players to mix and match, new system with old, but i get it, making it work is going to be a pain, as they already changed how the benches works, and might cause issues, this was my proposal before me playing with the system today.
-
(preffer the 1 but i understasnd the challenges) allow crafters as inventory items as decorations so the benches does not look empty, and have your wandering thralls, do the bonuses on your bases, the inventory workes will stay as decoration but will not provide any bonuses *i understand this is client side, and will have no effect on server performance)… the second option is purely cosmetic.
some of the things i said in this thread was me being ironic, about how limiting these changes are for some types of game play, not only waks, but i can see this happening to me as well.
i am a pve player, but i have heard the complaints of the pvp folks, which i believe are affected even more than PVE players.
so please codemage, excuse me if my message was understood in the wrong way. it was irony on my end.
1 Like
Ah, my apologies. I’m sometimes not very good at recognizing that.
As a player, I can see why people would come up with that idea. As a professional software development, I know it’s not going to happen. As I mentioned elsewhere, maintaining two separate systems like that is too costly.
I would wish you luck with your suggestion, but even that would be insincere, because it just won’t happen.
I’m afraid this won’t happen, either, but for a different reason. Whereas the first suggestion won’t happen because they don’t want to pay the cost of maintaining two redundant systems, the second suggestion won’t happen because of the sunk cost of the development of the system you currently see in TestLive.
Basically, your second proposal is not a simple cosmetic change of what they developed, it’s a suggestion to throw the whole thing they just spent months developing into trash and develop something else. Not going to happen, either
Here’s what might have a chance of happening if enough people ask for it and if the devs’ measurements indicate that the official servers can support it: raising the thrall cap.
And I apologize again for not realizing it.
1 Like
i know i am on the loosing side my friend. and i can certainly understand your reasoning behind it. i do!
but even it is almost an impossible goal to reach it is in my nature to try.
sadly what ihave experienced today was not a good experience with the bugs, and certainly the performance side keeps me worried, tbh, i do not expect them raising the limits, but on the contrraty i do expect then to lower the limit to 45 to 50 and to 150for 10 man clans, the official server performance is terrible. as it is now, and i can bet it is going to get a lot worse when this update hits servers with long and old databases, and with 6 + year old hardware runnign virtual machines.
one of the things i have been pushing is for funcom to upgrade those official servers. because the game has become more complex, and you are probalby aware that the game cant sustain more than 20 people on official servers,. this issue has been present since like at least 2 years ago.
1 Like