PLEDGE: Give us a HARD Block limit/ Placement pieces on Official Servers

I do this too. A simple stable with a beehive or campfire next to it, even a fully functional RP hut with a cupboard and a sign saying “take what you need.” It makes you look either careless or like a pro-social roleplayer, when really you’re collecting intel. Who gives things back? Who is an impulsive thief who steals everything, or even smashes the stuff because it’s RP Shizz?

For what it’s worth, that’s exactly how I’d interpret it. Definitely not as “any more than one structure and you will be obliterated.” Context: I’m a native english speaker with a university-level education.

@TeleTesselator I for one don’t think you’re a white knight, but I do think you seem to have a peculiar obsession with this issue and in getting your opinion across. You went away and empirically investigated a bunch of claims. You seem compelled to come into every single thread about it and repeat yourself, despite seeming exhausted and irritated. Like it’s your unpleasant job to make sure your take on this situation is at the forefront of every discussion.


Well I mean its not really up for interpretation; Funcom decides and its final. That’s kind of my point. If you want “clearly” defined rules with do’s and don’ts, you won’t find them on official servers. Good judgement doesn’t ask “can I get away with this?”, it asks, “Is this enough for me to play? I don’t want to cause a problem for someone else.” If its too hard for someone to grasp, they will play for awhile, get banned and if they want to continue to play, it will be on a private server or in single player where they belonged in the first place.


It could also mean you’re only allowed one base however.

If they want to continue to create revenue then they should allow for more clarity. These questions are being asked right here and are being largely ignored. We’re all squabbling when they can just set the record straight.

1 Like

But the fact that they don’t IS saying something. They have said all they’re going to say and its in the ToS. Saying something about it is a no win. If they had more to say on the matter, it would be in a broad release after careful wordsmithing. And you’re making an assumption that more people playing on officials will make them more money. That strongly depends on the cost of servers vs the profit margin on each copy they sell. We don’t have that number but they do.

So here we are. The ToS are what they are and they are being enforced. If people want to play on Officials, they should be on their best behavior. Otherwise they will find themselves kicked off officials, and playing single player, on private servers or not at all. None of that is debatable, and it doesnt look to me like its changing anytime soon.


Sounds like a fair summary. Exercise your judgment, no guarantees. I mean really that’s the case in all of life, we aren’t objective logic machines working inside a closed system (despite some people’s wishful thinking).

Personally I build what I consider to be sparingly, a small base and a couple of functional outposts. I feel confident that no admin would see what I was doing and delete and/or ban me, but I accept that they could if swamped with clever and malicious complaints :man_shrugging:

1 Like

For the record, I build big and sprawly and I’m a hoarder with control issues… which is why I have my own servers :rofl:


Yup, that’s pretty much it. I dunno if I would use the same words you did but they’re good enough. Like some people learn everything about the different armors and buffs and then make videos about which builds are optimal, I felt that someone should know what they were talking about on this particular issue. After I saw the frequency it was being asked about and noticed FC was remaining silent I thought it would be a good service to the forums. :crazy_face:

Yup, that’s why I based everything on actual examples. No explanations so let’s look at exactly what happened in each case…

Yeah, well, that’s the “spirit” the ToS requests we consider - in writing. :stuck_out_tongue:

Shoulda - woulda - coulda… it’s been what, 7 or 8 months now? They like what they have as far as precision and clarity go. Now it’s on us to figure it out and comply or not.


I have maintained that vague rules are in the favor of FC since this argument started back at the TOS update, and still do. I think you are right that the rules are fairly clear in terms of their message, however they absolutely are not in terms of their boundaries. Which is a big part of why this argument is so cyclical.

Every reasonable person can read the TOS and interpret that generally they demand us to function as good CE citizens. What it means to be a “good citizen” is much less clear and something we have had develop our understanding of for months now.

The new data point this thread introduced was alleged info from a GM stating that the definition of “land claim” included functional structures like a bridge built away from your base. If this information is true there are new boundaries that we have to establish at the cost of banned players. Things like:

  • What is the max distance from your base that is acceptable to build?
  • Does any structure count as an infraction: Foundation, fish trap, map room, small building?

Make no mistake, FC’s silence to protect themselves from “rules layering” comes at a cost to us, the players.


Now that every boundary has been tested, poked, and prodded however… The precise limits have been established.

We have already established that we disagree on that subject, I have no interest in discussing it further with you, nor do I think you are capable of doing so in good faith.


…until the next time someone comes along and says “I had a [insert build widely considered reasonable and in line with the spirit of the ToS] and it was deleted and I got banned!”

Then it’ll be yet another round of “you must be lying” or, “it was a false report by by cheaters” or, “you’re (all) wrong about what the ToS consider reasonable” or, “Funcom is secretly trying to drive everyone off officials!” And every other pointr of view we’ve seen.

What I mean is, you’ve always maintained that the ToS are clear and easy to understand. I’ve always felt they were pretty clear myself. Yet it’s taken many threads and discussion by many people in good and bad faith to even get as far as we have. And some of us (like me for example) were still surprised to wake up today and find out that anything beyond one base might be ruled as spam.

I’m not asking for more clarity. I agree with @darthphysicist that we’re not going to get it and it wouldn’t be helpful anyway. But I don’t agree that the limits have been established. They probably never will be.


You wanna know what’s the problem with specifics and black and white rules? No context is taken into account.

Am I reading this right that people are saying you can 9nly have 1 “base”? That’s a load of horse manure. That isn’t the problem…the problem is purposely using your buildings as negatives against others…it’s really that simple. A map room or a wop shack at mounds away from every thing isn’t killing the game…now claiming the entire water area of mounds…yeah WTF were you thinking? If you don’t know the difference between an 8x8 shack and a 40x40 platform to put 10 vaults, a fishing factory, a wop, and a map room…yeah just stop playing the game. Common sense has to rule here. Sure it’s vague but it allows context.


There’s a reason why I said it might be wishful thinking. I knew it was unlikely I would get an answer, but I still wanted to try. And if you think “me being me” is somehow special and elicits responses from Funcom more than anyone else, that’s wishful thinking too :wink:

Funcom community managers have the unfortunate tendency to become more responsive immediately on the heels of an announcement and then quickly go back to being an absentee landlord.

I haven’t seen actual evidence that this is Funcom’s answer. What I have seen is your own interpretation of the TOS, which you insist on representing as accurate, despite having extrapolated it from a limited sample of unreliable data.

The prospect of seeing proof of @Venakri’s Zendesk communication was exciting enough to bring me out of lurker mode and get embroiled in the discussion here again, but I would much rather see Funcom deign to get involved with their community enough to clarify this one question.

Like @darthphysicist, I’m aware of the players’ tendency towards “rules lawyering” and I’m generally against giving those players more ammo to do so, but saying whether it’s against the rules to have more than one base will hardly matter.

Plus, let’s face it, we’ve long since passed the point where we could claim that giving people more arguments for “rules lawyering” would be detrimental to the quality of discussions on these forums.


Well… yes… this is certainly true… and if I were Funcom, I’d stay out of it too! :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I thought a lot about these ban stories and finally if the problem was none other than the sanction itself.

Being banned corresponds to being erased from the game, we lose everything, whether for a big or a small offense.

It’s as if for a speeding of 3 mph we had 20 years in prison, then the solution could be that for the first offense the person is banned only 3 days and the object or the base which causes the problem is erased ,in this way the player can understand what is wrong without losing everything

ps: I use a translator be indulgent


You know, every time I say that, someone else points out that it’s their job. And I used to balk at that, because we’re all human, and we should think of other humans behind their own screens. I still believe that, but it’s a two-way street.

I got tired of defending Funcom devs and community managers as fellow humans, only to witness them make the same mistakes over and over again. If you look up what a community manager has to do, there are many definitions, but almost all of them include some variation of “engaging with customers”, “building relationships”, and “building consumer trust”. Take a look at the forums. Does it seem like they’re succeeding at that?

You know I’m not part of the “Funcom bad” crowd, but there has to be a point where we allow ourselves to be respectfully critical of the results of Funcom’s efforts.

Then again, I have a feeling that we could go back and forth on this for quite a while, and the only thing it would do is further lower the signal-to-noise ratio here, so I’m not gonna continue.


IDK I mean, there’s a line between being responsive to general inquiries and responding to every request. Like, if you post issues with the dedi server, it gets responses. Similarly if you report any other technical issue, it gets generally acknowledged quickly. I guess for me, its totally reasonable to not respond to “ I’d prefer the game work like this” threads. There are A LOT of those (and often very hostile and repetitive). They DO see them, and have acted on some of them and made changes. There is an issue tho that if people get a response to one random suggestion and not another that it creates the situation where now you must respond to most or all of them. I bet they have an informal rule internally about what to respond to and what to leave alone, probably in no small part because they may have a partially formed plan that addresses the concern and arent ready to talk about it. Idk I guess I’m just of the opinion that whatever they share is great, and what they don’t, they probably have a reason.

1 Like

They are but when a growing number of the customers are hungerly waiting in the wings for clarifications and use them as edicts that they feel cannot change…the company reps fall back because they internalize the error. Look at fence stacking. They made a call saying it’s not an exploit but creative…well that’s all fine and good until you stack 100’s of them so they had to drop the hammer because players abused the creativeness of it. Because of that, many of us that didn’t abuse it felt cheated. But here is the rub…they can’t tell us the real reason…the overuse and abuse of mechanics IE spammers IE a very large chunk of the PVP players are to blame…so they redefine it and call it a day. Leaving all of us scratching our collective heads going WTF?


That’s why I only post here in bursts, and try not to get too involved. This forum has a particular bad signal to noise ratio imo, for some reason. You gotta be judicious with your replies or you just end up adding to the noise.