Player responsibilities on Official Servers

I’m putting this in the feedback section to get some attention from the FC official types and potentially get feedback from them on their expectations but here is the topic at hand.

Do players have some or any responsibility for the server health (both in the memory management and in playability while in the game)? If so where is the limit before it is a FC issue to deal with and out of our collective hands? Obviously this is an open ended question with no real right answer but provides some feedback to FC on player’s thoughts on the topic and perhaps we could get a glimpse of their take.


The only thing I do all these years is always think of others too, this is not my server, I am a guest. And since I don’t like builds that reduce the gaming experience of others, I don’t build this way.

Mainly do not do to others what you don’t want others to do to you.

This is my life rule and I try to keep up… I try, I am not perfect, I try.



Treat others as you yourself would like to be treated.

And while ‘build within reason’ is a relatively vague statement, it’s easy to compare your own structures to those of others and judge for yourself if you stand out much (or don’t).

Something like this, for example, would be unreasonable in the extreme:


I’ve been playing online games for the better part of nearly thirty years and can say that players have been increasingly not taking responsibility and requiring companies to hold their hands when common decency should instead prevail. But yes much of the responsibility is on them.

There is a few constants that have not changed in literally half a decade. The capability, source, and location of officially provided servers. This means it will likely not change (in the case of provider this will never change). And with that, the amount of resources a player can use is limited. Those resource limits are also higher than what an individual needs. Much much higher.

So the question isn’t what FC needs to do in order to facilitate play for an individual, but how much leeway a player has once they obtain what they need in order to play the game. The answer to that, is don’t bother testing the limits. Play with the minimum amount necessary.

The officials are setup for a basic and casual experience. Hardcore building (as in any build built beyond the basic need to simply play the game) is meant for singleplayer or specially designed and hosted servers.

FC’s involvement is to weed out players on those basic and provided servers who can’t or won’t adhere to those standards by taking adverse action against them individually. As well as make modifications to the game when it cannot withstand the most basic needs of gameplay. But as already stated, the limits of an individual are already much higher than what they need. And last but not least, to focus on providing more content in the game rather than expending developer time, effort, and resources on features or limitations that can be handled by simple server settings or admin interactions. Only taking such actions when such features or limitations are asked for by a majority of the playerbase (which would include a significant part of private server players as they contribute a majority, while official players are a minority).




My opinions are divided. First is the fact that while Funcom is not required to provide official servers, it is undoubtable fact that it is in their best interest to do so. I bring up Ark a lot simply because it’s a very successful survival game, and their servers are a major part of why they’re so successful.

Conan just reported its most successful year ever. I feel that re-negotiating their G-Portal contract and getting better official servers that can handle the strain of buildings should be part of how they use their increased revenue. I also believe that some responsibility falls on the players (don’t build a 64x64 walmart parking lot) but there’s a lot of things that fall in the gray area.

My main point is this: Server health should be maintained by those that supply the servers. It should not be the players responsibility to keep the servers healthy. Outliers should be punished (like the aforementioned parking lot), but large structures like the ones Funcom advertises should not be punished. They showcase these structures as what’s possible, and are silent on what kind of server they’re on. They’re silent on that matter because the DLC they’re showcasing would sell less if it was found that building large structures with the new pieces will get you banned.


Oh and for the record…I am a very strong proponent of intellectual challenges as long as it’s civil and both parties respect eachother. That means if someone says something you disagree with, challenge em but provide logical reasons and/or evidence to support why you challenge. Of course who am I? I may get everyone in trouble with the PTB.

1 Like

A lot of private servers that struggle for players now they have a chance. No matter if official players is a minority, official players are asking simple things, no admin support for all the players and vanilla settings, but totally vanilla. So these admins who run low population servers now stand a chance to fill their servers with really good players and most of all they will have to serve none and play as players in their own servers. I will recommend again official servers for builders only. Want it or not the builders in this minority were the most. I don’t see this happening however, there for I believe that some admins have to see this as a chance of a lifetime.

Almost afraid to even comment on this OP, but while I agree with your statement in general, it lacks specifics.
Five years ago, logging into any Official server as a new player found every inch of area along the noob river built over or claimed. There was no decay.
Five years ago, you had some enterprising Easterners that would wall off entire sections of the game, then post a sign with a website, saying go here to purchase this land. There was no climbing.
three years ago there were massive, humungous, outrageous builds all over the place. There was the starship Enterprise, there where gigantic land claims and refresher cities.

My big burning question is, WHY did it take Funcom five years to decide to police their servers?

To the OPs point, player responsibility is NOT being rude, obnoxious in chat, cheating, walling off and blocking key points of the map, building racist structures, and generally not making an ass of yourself in the game.
And yes, building gigantic structures was always an annoyance to me, but I took it in stride as FC advertised it as a game feature.
Changing the TOS was also not a problem for me, until I heard all of the horror stories about the arbitrary blitzkrieg.

So my question, directly to you Taemien, is again, why five years later?
Why did they not specify that in the beginning, if it was truly so?


I actually got a theory on the timing of it all… enforcement and trimming. I suspect we will get server upgrades with higher amount of players capable of being on line so everyone needs to settle into smaller builds earlier than later…just a hunch I have.

Doubtful, but I would be all for that if I knew what the build limits were.
I do know some of the limitations thanks to the CSM, but think they created a monster they are just now realizing was out of control, and their first attempt to control it was to . . . .
2021-11-07 11_50_38-flame on - Google Search

1 Like

I have always been a build small type player, but the benches keep getting bigger and bigger.
If I want a lower over head cost, because I do very little resource farming. I need a ginormous base.

I really hope you are correct and they are moving toward smaller.


That is an extremely thorny question. A few months ago, I would have answered with a categorical, emphatic “yes, players are responsible”, but I’ve had cause to reconsider and realize that there’s more nuance here than I originally thought.

I do believe with all my heart that the players have responsibility toward their fellow players. That’s just the way I was brought up and I doubt anything will change my mind at this age.

However, “responsibility toward fellow players” is not the same as “responsibility for the server health”. There are two very important differences that should not be overlooked:

  • On the one hand, server health is only one aspect of the responsibility to fellow players. A server is a shared space, and we should treat it as such. Just as you shouldn’t litter in a kids’ sandbox in a park, so you should treat a server with the same amount of respect for those who share it with you.
  • On the other hand, the responsibility for server health is not on players’ shoulders alone. Rather, Funcom has their own share of responsibility there.

And that’s why the question is thorny. Yes, players do have some degree of responsibility for the server health, but how should they deal with that responsibility?

Right now, the players simply don’t have the necessary tools to shoulder that responsibility. We have no way of measuring our impact on a server or reasoning about our builds.

Let’s say you build a castle, then someone builds another castle a short run away from you. The server starts getting laggy. What’s causing it? Is it your castle? Is it theirs? What is it about your castles that’s causing the problem? Is it that you organized your storage into hundreds of different chests containing different things? Is it that their castle has all of their followers inside? Nobody knows and nobody can know.

Meanwhile, we’re here on the forums squabbling about whether “11 torches” should be against the TOS and whether it’s okay to have public map rooms.

What I’m trying to say in my long-winded, rambling way, is that even though I feel we should have some degree of responsibility for server health, I also feel that Funcom isn’t doing their part.

They decided to place more responsibility on us without giving us the tools we need to shoulder that responsibility, and that created a problem that has only been growing over time. And they need to stop dragging their feet and help solve that problem.


There’s a lot of talk about tools and burdens. So let’s nip this quick. First all the tools you need to be able to see impact is your own two eyeballs and common sense (or as one of my drill sergeants once said, “good sense, since its apparently not that common.”). Its pretty simple, build the crafting stations you need, build then in a structure that it fits in, get it tucked in nice and tight, and then just enough storage to keep what you need, discarding what you don’t.

Next is the burden of a server owner/admin. I’ve been both and sometimes at the same time, so this is from experience. Here’s what the responsibility is here. Reboot the server once in a while. You can do this whenever its needed (differs server to server), or you can automate it. In either case you sometimes have to reboot it inbetween scheduled restarts for whatever reason. They could probably use a little improvement here. But I’m not sure how to do this. There isn’t any way to monitor the server playability (for most times) without logging in. Its not feasible for a server admin to login to 500 servers a day. It would literally take all day and you’d have to start again right as you finish and even then there’s still a chance a server halfway through will go glippy in that rotation. So they have to rely on player reports. I personally use Discord for that. They use Zendesk to cover the 1,000-1,200 players and 500 servers they have. They’re probably using the best tool there for that.

They also need to update the server when updates happen. Well I would wager FC is about the best when it comes to updating the servers when the game updates being as they are responsible for both. Their servers get the updates as they happen. They are about 5-10 minutes quicker on this than I am on average.

Finally you have rule enforcement. They make rules and they enforce them. Ideally a server owner will make rules and will enforce (or have admins help them enforce) them by a specific standard. This can vary server to server. Both in what the rules are, and how they are enforced (if using similar rules). Now here is where the misunderstanding is.

The rules govern what sort of players and playstyles you have on the server. They should only really be seen as guidelines when determining what server you wish to play on. You all shouldn’t be playing on these servers going “how close to the standard are we allowed to get?”

This is why you don’t have hard tools, hard limits, and silly features that disable building automatically after a certain point. There’s no need for that. As I said before, if you build the minimum that you need to play the game. You will be far under any standard being assessed. No one has gotten banned for building too much when building the minimum needed stuff to play. Umbrols was pretty clear about this in two seperate threads that the officials are pretty much meant for casual play and minimum building. There’s thousands of servers for other types of play if you all should desire to play in a manner that requires more than that.

But if you all are still not understanding. Go to singleplayer, enable admin mode, spawn in all the crafting stations. Tetris them up and then measure it in foundations. Now compare that to your build. If your build is more than 2x that, then you may want to reduce. Sooner than later. If you’re reading this, then ignorance cannot be claimed. If you get hemmed up by adverse action or a devwipe, then it was because of a decision you made, not ignorance or misunderstanding. Hence why this sort of thing is the responsibility of the player. This paragraph literally has all the information you need to be in compliance considering build size and impact on server performance.

1 Like

Like you, I’ve had a few mind changes on all these questions. Mostly however, on whether or not the rules were able to be recognized purely using common sense. My current position is that they ARE NOT! That was made clear to me by our exchanges with @Umborls - which I am thankful for. So yeah, feet dragging should be rectified ASAP.

After reading everything here my mind isn’t changed from yesterday or last week. The answer is:


But there’s a related second question you didn’t ask - prolly because the answer is obvious:
Are players responsible for trying to understand and keep the rules?
And the answer is: YES! ABSOLUTELY!

But, and here’s the caveat, it is ABSOLUTELY Funcom’s responsibility to make the rules clear and understandable - yes, so even those wishing to push the limits will know where those limits are!

People are NOT always sheep! People will not always meagerly and submissively play and build minimalistically - and that’s a given! It’s ludacris, unreasonable, and downright unfair to expect people to limit their builds to something like two times the space all your benches would otherwise require - ESPECIALLY when there are no rules to that affect - at all - anywhere! But once again and for the umpteenth time, I will remind people here that:

Funcom has stated (SEVERAL TIMES), size is NOT an issue! It’s not an issue they consider when evaluating a build according to them! The other rules plus “intent and function” (whatever the hell that means in a dynamic role playing world) are what they claim to be considering.

Our ONLY responsibility as Official Server players is to understand and keep the rules!

If FC is going to offer public “official” servers it is ENTIRELY their responsibility to use equipment and settings which facilitate and allow smooth uninterrupted game-play within the rules they establish.

1 Like

Yeah, no. There’s been plenty of evidence to the contrary. I’m not interested in rehashing it for you just because you wanna pretend you don’t understand what words mean.

That has nothing to do with the ability to measure your impact on the server. That’s just “FYGM” disguised as advice. “If you build the way I prefer, then the admins on the official servers won’t ban you.” And that’s even more disingenuous coming from someone who doesn’t play on official servers at all.

I don’t go around telling people how to run their own private servers, because I’m not a private server admin. You’re welcome to have an opinion on official servers, but don’t be surprised if people call you out when you pretend to have knowledge and experience you don’t have.

We’re not. You’re deliberately misrepresenting people’s motivations here.

Yes, you keep saying that. Did it occur to you that we’re perfectly capable of understanding that and maybe you’re the one missing the point?

No, he wasn’t “pretty clear” about officials being meant for “minimum building”. Honestly, if anyone from Funcom came out and actually said that in clear language, we wouldn’t be having these kinds of discussions.

For quite literally years, Funcom has allowed a variety of playstyles on their official servers. Players have been allowed a great deal of leeway when choosing how to build. We’re trying to understand how that changed.

That’s what this is all about.

Everything we do on a server is a decision we make. The ignorance and misunderstanding we’re trying to prevent are about which decisions lead to which outcome.

Thing is, you understand all of that perfectly. This is not the first time someone has explained it to you. So in the interest of actually having a productive thread for once, this is as far as I’ll go in this discussion with you.

Hopefully others will also catch on and not rise to your bait anymore.



How much you want to wager its small enough to avoid adverse action? So its 100% everything to do with the impact.


This thread and others like it are testament to the contrary.

It’s been laid out now… You can’t claim ignorance anymore. I gave you a means to avoid a ban. Its your choice to take the advice or not. But if you get actioned, it was the decision you all made.

Not! Thanks for playing tho. It’s incorrect for one, and I’ll add to that, a bit ludicrous!

It’s OK though… I used to think something kind of similar. But as @CodeMage pointed out, all evidence points to that notion being false and incorrect! Oh well, live and learn bro!

There are many ways to avoid being banned. But let’s take your logic a step further and say: The way not to be banned is simply not to install the game at all. Umm, yes, this will actually work but it’s a false notion and causes more problems than it solves!!! No, the best way is to understand and keep the rules. And that is where these discussions keep going… the language used by FC for disseminating the rule-set is inadequate for the general public. And, some of what is understood is contradictory.

I would also claim that whatever explanation and documentation there is… isn’t well placed, as the majority of players don’t even know it exists - if my experiences with other online players are any indication.

And you can see this playing out here all the time too. What, about once a day someone new starts a thread: “My base disappeared - all but thralls are gone” followed up by another post 24hours later… “I have been banned - why?” Then every 5th person or so starts a thread similar to this one.

I’m interested to know what problems my suggestion causes. It sounds like its simply something you all don’t want to do, rather than it actually being a problem. Let’s not get facetious with claims that not playing is even close to being equivalent. Building the minimum that you need to craft any item, leveling a bit, and completing all the content in the game is hardly causing any issues nor is it too much to ask.

I’ve said it before, I don’t like the rules either. I don’t even like how they enforce the rules. But that doesn’t make them convoluted nor does it take away from the players’ responsibilities to follow them.

I really want to agree with this statement. And in a vacuum I would. But in the cases I’ve seen where someone has ran afoul, they’ve gone full lawyer mode and tried to quote everything they can to show some form of injustice. So I get wary around peeps who tend to look up rules after the fact.

So if they put a link to the rules on the launcher, I doubt the number of issues you mentioned would actually go down. After seeing what some of these people have been doing for a long time, I just don’t trust that many are innocently running afoul. I really just don’t. In every case I’ve seen, its been for something that would never have been permitted on any server I’ve played on. But for the sake of logic, I’ll support putting a link on the launcher.

Sure, that’s to be expected within the given sequence of events.

  • Build to your idea of common sense →
  • Get slapped with a ban and a wipe →
  • Try to figure out why by asking and searching on-line →
  • Find and read the scattered rules here and elsewhere →
  • Disagree that your situation fits, think the rules are unfair, or hate the punishment →
  • Go full lawyer mode, play the victim card, call Funcom names and stuff.

We usually only get to see the last phase there but sometimes we can see it from stage three as well. Sometimes we even get to see every phase unfold before our very eyes…

I believe you just answered your own question there. Would you like to play a game when you don’t want to do whatever is involved in playing that game? People can accept reasonable limits of course. Two times - even 4 times your accumulated bench areas isn’t acceptable for most - (many people don’t even want to think like that). I build moderately and if I count blocks I’m at about 6 or 8x. But that doesn’t even matter really because Funcom has stated it’s not about size.

I suspect that if a player had only one bench, three boxes, and some decorations in each 10x6 room and had 10 or 12 such rooms, FC would not implement a ban or wipe - unless it was breaking other rules like covering 1-skull boss spawn points, sitting too close to a community POI, stacking, and so on. Most people don’t wanna run that far between benches, but I believe it would be acceptable to build like that given what FC has said on the topic. And given that some truly HUGE bases are said to be within the rules by FC themselves after examination.

1 Like