Linked thralls to buildings aside from a following thrall, would cut this down and the amount, linking to building decay also.
And if resource blocking, obelisk blocking is an issue. I’d have no objection to a mega purge appearing if there is no pathable route to it.
Make sure though no purge only thralls appear otherwise it’ll be a reason for blocking.
Same could be done for buildings over certain size, would mean it would take alot of defending, lost thralls etc
1 Like
100 thralls per player would be to much. on the stream the programers stated that there was defianly a problem at about 400 to 450 thralls. so 1000 thralls per clan would be a problem.
Frankly, that’s their own fault.
I’m not saying it’s a perfect solution but 55 to 100 per clan is just too drastic of a cap. The current plan penalizes joining a clan. The reverse should be true, there should be benefits to joining a clan…and no adding 5 thralls per clan member isn’t an incentive. The idea is that people will have one base but on pve servers that simply won’t happen. People will either leave clans, move to private servers, play single player, or flat out quit the game. Building bases, collecting thralls to put in those bases, and just generally collecting stuff are the reasons people play on pve servers. Those who don’t generally level up, complete the boss and dungeon content, and then leave usually inside of a month of gameplay. Dedicated pve players build and collect.
I’ve been playing Ark and frankly even as things stand now the lag on Ark is worse than it is in Conan and still people manage to play. And ride mounts I might add. Not to mention Ark has more active players per server. On Conan a cap of 100 thralls per person will reduce the lag. It may not get rid of it but it will certainly reduce it. If you’re looking for a completely lag free experience…well, good luck with that.
1 Like
Lure in bosses and as many other enemy NPCs as you can. They’ll either focus on the boss, which they can’t knock out with a truncheon, and get killed by the NPCs or they attack the NPCs and the boss will kill them. Without someone there healing them they’ll go down eventually.
Perhaps. I’ll grant you that it’s low. But given that they’re introducing it at a time when most current thralls will have to be replaced anyway, it makes perfect sense to start low and increase it later rather than introducing a limit of, say, 300 only to have to reduce it a few months in.
Well having advantages and disadvantages to joining a clan is balanced, it doesn’t have to be all good. But sure, five extra thralls is not much on an incentive if that’s ALL you’re doing it for, no. But there ARE advantages (and disadvantages) outside of the thrall limit.
I agree that doesn’t happen much currently, but then there has been no incentive to “live together”, rather the game has - so far - seemed to suggest a “live together, apart” kinda approach to clanning up, at least in so far as its mechanics go. Maybe this will play a part in changing how people view and use the clan system though?
The only issue I see is the lack of functionality supporting the splitting of a clan, but that’s always been one of the main downsides (and the number one reason I never joined one). I’m sure there are those for whom this will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, but probably not nearly as many as will claim to quit as some sort of pseudo-threat.
I agree. I very much enjoy those aspects of the game, too. But I don’t accept that you cannot still do that with a cap - you’re just going to have to decide which thralls to keep instead of just ALL OF THEM. I am very much looking forward to my chosen having an extra dimension and playing Thrall Breeder 2019.
No comment on the Ark stuff, as I never played that game.
On re-reading, this comes off a bit combative, that isn’t my intent really, but I can’t be arsed to go back and edit all the phrasing.
3 Likes
No, I don’t see that happening. Even without thralls the primary reason for playing on pve servers is building. It’s just the nature of pve servers. Once done with bosses and dungeons there’s little else to do besides build and collect. That kind of makes it sound unappealing but it’s actually what I like doing and I believe what most people on pve servers like doing. Otherwise there’s really no point to pve servers at all, people would be better off playing on pvp or pve-c servers.
And if you’re going to build you want to give your build some life thru the use of thrall placement. It’s just not the same if you can’t people those bars and taverns players just created from the last dlc as well as placing them on walls, balconies, and just anywhere a person should be to give a build life. You can’t do that with just 10 thralls.
3 Likes
I’m sorry, ten? Ah, you mean because people will insist on still clanning up despite having nothing in common, so they’ll have to share their thrall allowance? Yeah, I suppose.
Like I said, I think the lack of a (good, viable) way to split clans is an issue. But I don’t think a move towards clans having an incentive to live together is necessarily bad - it’s just different from how it has been thus far.
It is not my bluff. I don’t use alts. There are some very decent people who are already contemplating how to abuse/cheese the system to get the max. An exploit is not always a hack or gaining extra stuff, sometimes it is exploiting a loop hole of sorts.
I am not trying to discredit. I am just making sure Funcom knows their are people who want to play the game lag free, and are willing to let them, the designers and people with the most data, do what they need to give the game life for the foreseeable future. I am not one to trudge in the same. And i am sure there are others who grew tired of the same ole same ole. I for one want new mechanics to challenge me. It is the only reason i play on PVP. The game is so monotonous otherwise for me, the “edge” of having an unpredictable enemy makes the farming more fun. A majority of those opposed want to play like it is SP on an official shared server. I have never said they can’t play that way, just that it is as selfishs as cheaters and trolls when they can’t see (or don’t care)+ the trouble they cause to the environment of public servers. For something meant as public sharing space, their are trade offs. And the uproar shows me that they are not willing to understand that. If one wants mega castles, and to decorated their castle with different thralls, that is fine, but do that on privates or SP. Since Funcom has stated the unlimited play style for capturing is contributing to the server issues on officials, then those people are no better than trolls who enjoy building massive sandstone land claims just for the fun of bothering people. If we want a truly unlimited public domain, then we can never complain about those players. IF i have a pick and i crafted 4000 sandstone foundations, then i should be allowed to place them how i want and where i want if that is how i get my jollies in the game.
I think @Larathiel uses a great solution to killing mass unconsious thralls, drag them all together, and gas them, as well as light attack with the spear (hits multiple piled up targets)
My point is if others do this, and as one poster suggested their clan of 10 will do it for each, they may be finding a way to over populate thralls again, causing possible server issues (maybe Funcom is smarter than we think and saw this trick coming, so the cap number is so low). So in that instance they are exploiting alts to lag the server. And know that the limit was put in place just for the reason they are working around. And alts are an exploit. Again, exploits are necessarily ways to break the tech, just a way to work around and exploit the mechanic for unintended use. Like having alt vaults logged high up somewhere so you don’t need to store your clan loot.
Wish I could remember who came up with that technique, but it is pretty handy. The overhand chop from the revised greatsword does a pretty good job as well.
If it’s a purge, another trick is to simply put KO’d thrall on a wheel and immediately remove them.
1 Like
Yes, I’m already in a clan. My base was built before I joined a clan. As a matter of fact I joined a clan just days before this update was announced…and no I wouldn’t have joined had I known this was coming. I can’t leave the clan because I would lose months of work. My base would become the clans base and I would be left high and dry. Don’t get me wrong the people in this clan are good people and it’s a good clan but had I known this update was coming I wouldn’t have joined. So yeah, I’d say that’s a problem. One that needs to be solved before implementing this update. Or they could just increase the cap. You tell me which would be easier for them to do.I’m far from the only person in this boat.
If I wanted different, I would have chosen a different game. I played a game where I could build and collect. I did so within reason and did not abuse the system as others have. In fact had I not joined a clan then I would have fallen within the 55 limit for a single player and would not have had to delete any thralls or pets. But with this upcoming update it will no longer be the game I want to play, not on the official servers anyway. On official servers where I put most of my time my style of play will be no more and I have no desire to play it any other way. So like many others I have to choose whether to accept the cap, play single player, or quit.
I’m sorry, I was under the impression this was a multiplayer game. I guess I was mistaken. The thing we have in common is the game and the desire to be social. But I guess that’s just too much to ask from a game that was designed as a multiplayer game.
1 Like
The irony here is that it really is starting to seem that you are having real trouble trying to play the way you want to on official servers and want everyone else to conform to your sp vision of what officials should be.
The people (funcom) with the most data wanted to hear our feedback and we are giving it when we say we don’t like the change.
I’ll agree that foundation spam etc is a blight but building a big Castle is not the same thing, that is what drew us to it in the first place.
Calling other people selfish for wanting their playstyle to carry on is funny as you seem unable to comprehend anything but your own view.
Have you considered that you might be able to go to private or sp to play how you like?
2 Likes
And for the record I read it as “we need to improve performance enough so the game doesn’t break apart when we bring in the horses”
Itl still be the same or worse performance wise after, while also introducing a whole new wave of bugs
I’d also say that if this rollout is anything but perfection there’s going to be a whole new feedback thread
Hopefully they will see sense and change it, I’ll be glad then to debate and advise you when your complaining
Seems if you are making a point apposed to a proposed change that another person disagrees with, then , to that person your seen as complaining , go figure eh
I’m sure your get your chance sooner or later
Yet you assume that those stating they do not want the change are complaining, and just need to get used to the change as all will be ok in the end.
You’ll be there to advise us after.
A +5 thralls per person limit for clans is ridiculous. How about a +25 per person limit?
Dancer thralls are used by a lot of people for decoration. How about having an item called “Dancing Platform” that is a small wooden circle a foot high, about a foundation in diameter, where the dancer could be placed to dance? The dancing platform would have a one slot inventory where a dancer (or maybe also a bearer) could be placed. The dancer would dance only, and provide healing buffs, but would not be able to fight… He/she would just keep dancing, like the crafting thrall keep crafting, and would not be interactable.
1 Like
Yeah, no. “Exploit” has a very clear definition in software. I won’t tell a doctor what “myalgia” is supposed to mean, I won’t tell a lawyer what “inalienable” means, and I won’t let a redefinition of “exploit” slide, either.
There’s no bug or vulnerability involved in this scenario, so calling it an exploit is incorrect. Feel free to call it a loophole, but that doesn’t have the same ring as “cheater”, “exploiter” and “troll”, does it?
And you can do so without repeatedly resorting to ad-hominems. You can disagree with me or anyone else on opinions. You can point out logical inconsistencies and factually incorrect statements. You can state your opinion freely. All of those will contribute towards your goal of clearly communicating your message to Funcom and the rest of the community.
You can also resort to strawman arguments, false dichotomies and slippery slopes. Just as you feel free to use them, I’ll feel free to point them out, because I value critical thinking and rational discussions.
But you cross a whole different line when you start calling people “cheaters” and “trolls”. It’s quite easy and perfectly normal to disagree with people without attacking them personally. I wish more people on this forum would realize that.
You know, I really hate it when people do that to me – marginalize my playstyle (and that of many other people like me), dismiss it out of hand and suggest moving to private or single-player. I’m guessing you don’t like that, either. So what makes you think it’s somehow fine to do it to others?
2 Likes
Couldn’t agree with you more.
I was repeating his own post pointing out that he also could be the one to go to sp/ private server.
Rather than as he said in his post anyone else that disagrees with his style of play.