innovative idea but realistically it’s not possible. They would be the first game I’ve ever heard of to have admins on official servers. The labor cost would eat profits and not be very cost effective either. Would be nice though.
Disagree, a thousand or so servers, not an MMO where they are getting monthly fees to pay for that kind of staffing. Ark doesn’t do this, nor any other survival sandbox game that I know of. If you want active admins, head on over to a private server of your choice.
It is not a bug, it is not a mistake. It is the best way to run free servers.
- If it is a hack on/to the servers, contact G-Portal
- If it is a hack on the user account, contact Steam
- If it is a hack on the map that does not allow players access to the game, contract Funcom
If it is another player behaving badly…
- Play on a private server with shared gaming ethics
- Start your own private server where you write the rules
- Play Solo/co-op to avoid other players
- Play PvE to avoid being attacked but engage with other players
- Play PvP to be able to attack players that are behaving badly
- Play PVE-C to limit risks of being attacked why holding the opportunity to attack and/or engage with other players
There are many ways to play this game. There are many players with different backgrounds. Find the right mode and server for you and enjoy the game
I’d expect a substantial amount of players who would pay happily for better quality and moderated servers.
Bad performance, griefing and harassment, etc etc,
could be considered a big factor in CE Official servers.
Compagny provided (pre)paid Official servers with moderation/administration?
It’s realistically the only way, unless you have some sort of ongoing income (CE doesn’t provide this). The DLC packs no doubt help make CE “worth it” to Funcom management (it’s one reason why I bought the Pict pack even though it doesn’t appeal all that much to me), but there’s a long way from there and to warranting paid, professional GMs.
While jobs like that are usually not very lucrative (admittedly dubious source: I have a friend who was a WoW GM for a short while), they’re still a significant cost, especially given the low number of players/server. Obviously one GM would oversee many servers, but even so it’s unfortunately a gigantic task. What’s more, Funcom generally don’t seem to see most player actions, no matter how destructive to others’ enjoyment, as a problem.
Honestly, we would love to be able to provide this service for our over 1000 official servers but there is a reason you mostly see games such as MMOs with monthly subscription do this. It’s the monthly subscriptions (or paid constant in game shops) that keep servers up and running and enable companies to provide not only the manpower but also the infrastructure and needed back-end for administrated servers and GM interactions.
Since CE does not have monthly subscriptions or a constant in game shop, we are trying to provide features and mechanics that help with problematic in-game issues. We adjusted the decay system to address land claim/land spam and make it harder for people to grief with building and blocking of areas. There is a mute function for other players and we implemented a 2 tier system for clans to be able to filter chest access between new and veteran clan members and we implemented an option to hide offensive signs played by other players.
All of this is an ongoing process and we will keep looking for ways to help create a better server environment for everyone.
Tascha, while you are at it, please brainstorm on the endless walls in servers, the whole game is destroyed by them.
For instance on #1040 all biome’s are ruined by two or 3 players fighting their wall wars.
You cannot swim or walk to get stuck in them.
Like the whole jungle is so littered you cannot build a nice build anywhere.
Same on 1035 where "travelers"clan is building a wall around seper and the obi.
Verbally abusing and bullieng the players along the way.
Where “Hyenas” are building endless walls.
Me i do not care ive been EA-ed, but my friends on CE do.
Nothing players can do then absorb the pain and bough for the insults.
All our friends we played with big fun have left. We had a great community.
Those (pve-c) tools to grief others should be examined and tryed to be solved.
I have to agree. I fully recognize (as written above) that full-time admin-service on officials is not viable, but PVE and PVE-C servers are suffering from a few bad apples spoiling the barrel, as it were.
It’s making me and others on my server reconsider our time investment in CE, and while I don’t want to scream “fix or I quit” (and indeed that’s not what I’m saying), there may come a time - and soon - when significant numbers of casual players no longer feel like playing the game if this anti-social behavior is allowed unchecked.
Off the top of my head, some kind of “admin token” could perhaps be granted to players, and if enough people use it, it’d warrant looking-into from an admin. It’d be a way to prevent frivolous use (or abuse) of it, perhaps. I am well aware this is not easy to do due to Conan Exiles not having a proper “account” system like you’d see in an MMO, say, and a thousand servers would probably generate significant workload even so.
So, I suppose all I’m saying is that some brainstorming on alternate solutions or models might be a good idea if official servers are to remain viable.
Please make sure to report those to exploit hunters. We are taking actions in extreme cases which these sound very much like.
I am not directly involved in those investigations but we are having dedicated people looking at these reports.
We’ve actually discussed a voting system similar to this. It’s not something that will happen super soon since we have to focus on other higher priority issues and as you mentioned, it will take time to implement but it’s definitely on our radar.
Im asking you to direct that problem (not the the griefers, but the possibillty to do it)to the right funcom people.
I do not have any faith in the exploiters procedure.
Let me please politely try to force again as i think its an important issue and directly related to the topic we are at
- The possibilty of building large structures makes a tool for griefers in pve©
The problem is that in pve© you cannot destroy those builds.
In pvp you bomb a wall/griefer and live on.
The possibility of building long walls creates the possibility of getting round the decay problem a griever basicly has, as the griefer connects all walls to one point and only has to log in on 1 position to reset all to 144.
so players (Griefers)build immense walls over whole biomes to connect and they can close off towns and obi’s. And maintain them(!)
So imo pve © needs a solution to that, and the possibilty of blocking obi’s
That would make a prominent part of griefing obsolete, and consequently the wish or need for moderated servers lower.
Having said that, what solution could that be?
Clan surrounding obelisks, sources and bases. Harassment and griefing
I think she refers to setting the timer back to six days, which of course doesn’t really do much to combat the problem, since you can just connect everything together with “decay umbilicals” if you don’t care about the consequences of building the damn things all over the map. And since we’re dealing with problem players in the first place… yeah. It doesn’t really work.
Voting to revoke a particular players PvE protection would be amazing.
Being in good standing with the community would be part of survival as it has always been.
A system to block obelisk structures does not differentiate between public maprooms and griefer walls. Communities do.
Yes nice approach, wish that would be viable in a safe way, so it cannot be abused.
I’ve said this very thing since before release, and got the same non-answers.
Funcom had a fantastic opportunity to change the standard for online play by developing a system that would allow for functional administration of their servers.
I have been very disappointed in the consistent “this is just the way it’s done” answers.
On the technical side, let’s think worst case scenario, an exploit has been found to bypass voting and disable someone’s PvE protection - then massive damage is done; some players quit right there, but others will burn with vengeance so danm hot, they will spend the next 6 months destroying their destroyers, but with the system properly used by the community who witnessed the crime. This is what democracy is for.
On the political side - a majority vote needs to be reached, and not everyone will vote, or it’d take a long time to reach a consensus. It is said that democracies rarely start wars. But when it DOES, then it’s all out balls-the-the-walls because it is what people consider needed, and not just orchestrated by some ■■■■■■■ with an agenda. Atleast that’s how it works with a democracy without representation coughRepubliccough
If a voting system can be “abused” by having a majority vote pass because an alpha clan has 10 active people answering to a monarch, v.s. 6 single clans out there, and systematically wipes them out with the system then
The monarch deserves that power, because 9 people listen to him. In this day and age, it’s hard enough as it is to get 9 strongly individualistic people with different backgrounds, gender and religion to agree with you in the first place. A unanimous vote even within a clan is an achievement.
A monarch who has the respect of 9 people doesn’t go bully people for no reason. If he does, he becomes a tyrant, and when that happens, it unites the server against him.
So my proposal - If there are more than 5 downvotes, the bill is VETO’d, cuz that’s usually half a server’s population these days on average.
If a vote has more than 5 votes for it, and 1 vote against after 2 weeks, the bill is passed.
If a vote has more than 5 votes for it, and more than 1 vote but less than 5 votes against it, the bill stays for a month, before it is passed.
If a vote has 14 for, and 6 against, the bill is veto’d.
Which means any clan larger than 5 people can veto a bill, because frankly, 6 people is a substantial population. If they are all ■■■■■■■■ at the same time, then oh well. It’s better than mega clans preying on small clans with the system though.
Let’s say there’s 1 alpha clan of 10 people, and your the only single clanner there… well. You’d be living under their rule with or without a voting system. even in PvE.
IMHO a clan who has a lot of people deserves it’s power, cuz it’s an institution that serves several people.
If there is even a hint of internal strife in a clan, it only needs one tribey to log on between 3 and 5 AM, and wreck everything.
People forget that tribes are nothing more than a unilateral marriage agreement amongst heterosexual men (usually) and that… requires an incredible amount of maturity.
The importance of an elected player admin with a single 200 hour banning power per month on official PvE
I know what you are talking about.
There are some variables upthere, but it’s the principle procedure, that is your initial point if i see right.
i do not know if above views are the only solutions btw.
It seems a small problem but the consequences/ impacts are so severe they are the amongst the main problems of CE concerning griefers and pve © (unmoderated)
The brainstorms are refreshing in a misty CE community world lol
All just imo and with a smile
One solution would to make Claim Items. Some kind of in game item, high in cost, that must be recharged every so often, that has to be placed inside of bases to “create claim radius.” If anything is out of that radius, it decays over a 3 week time max, no resetting it. if something is within the radius, it acts as it does now as far as resetting goes.
This would do 2 things in my opinion,
PVE/PVE-C–make it near impossible to spam walls across the maps.
PVP—create strategic attack points when raiding someone, which adds elements to siege war fare outside of wipe or grief.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.