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

Well there’s a difference between what the GM said (random bridges, foundations, fences) and an outpost, which is a self-contained building with a purpose. At least, I hope they see a difference.

2 Likes

It certainly could be the case that it’s “QOL” builds that are the offense. It’s just that in my mind “QOL” can encompass things that are not as cut and dry as an elevator into the skeleton dragon pit. Map rooms, thrall wheel near priority thralls, etc. would fall under “QOL” no?

1 Like

It lead me to that assumption. I thought it was quite clear myself. I even wrote it up for others

And this is the second time I’m linking it in this thread. I’ve linked it in about 20 threads total.

It’s not a new policy. Only a new enforcement regimentation.

Not “could be”. It absolutely is. And it’s both what you’re calling QOL (I call it sateliting) and having multiple bases. One is what FC wants you to have. You might be able to get away with two for a large clan - or one and a work outpost - something like that. But even so, if you’re nervous about getting banned, I wouldn’t. Even in the GM’s reply, notice the language:

“As long as you keep your base (singular - one base) condensed in a specific area (singular - one area) and, don’t land claim… (etc.)”

I don’t think the obvious conclusion of these is that “satelliting” or “QOL” builds necessarily place them in violation. We could say they are more at risk maybe. An elevator from the beach up to the jungle obelisk wouldn’t, I don’t think, violate these outlines.

1 Like

Read the whole page! I definitely get that impression! For example (and again, pay attention to the language being used):

“Please remember that there are other players sharing the server with you. Restricting others’ access to content is not allowed beyond of course grabbing a spot for your base.”

Notice again a singular spot or area and a singular base. And I’ll add that all evidence points to them thinking and treating a multi-player clan as a single entity.

I have read and argued the TOS since before they republished them. I don’t infer from:

“If you build anything outside of your base area (which we haven’t actually defined), you are in violation of the rules”

That statement is clearly more about restricting access of content to other players.

My initial point remains, if FCs position is that you are ONLY allowed to build in one location, and ANY instance of a build regardless of whether it violates the actual specific guidelines we have been given (bullet points previously listed) is grounds for a ban, they are grossly at odds with how people play their game.

If that’s their position they should just steal one of the many “area of allowable build space” ideas posted here and avoid the awful dance that is Zendesk reporting/banning.

2 Likes

And that is I believe, why people come here to complain - they cannot understand simple English. “A base” and “A spot” has no other meaning than that which I suggested. That, they never actually read it in the 1st place, or they knew but just thought they could skate. I’m not trying to be the English police, those are just the cold hard facts and Funcom’s actions reflect and support this as well. If they wanted to say …grabbing a few spots for your bases., that’s what they would have said.

Well that’s an obvious fact, although I’m sure they would say it in the opposite way - and rightly so since it’s their game:

ie. Some people are grossly at odds with Funcom’s guidelines (rules) for official servers.

And from what I’ve seen on the 9 servers I’ve investigated, “some people” is somewhere around 25%. And currently about 20% of those people are being reported. So right around 5% of the players on the servers I’m on have been admin wiped (sounds close anyway - around 2 or 3 people per server - on average). Although sateliting isn’t the only cause, it seems to be one of the biggest reasons - and often is at least one of the violations which bring them down.

Still not accepting the reality yet? This is one of the “actual specific guidelines given”. It’s right there in front of you in black and white.

Duh! :wink:


And before I get called a white knight or some other ridiculous thing once again from people looking to take out their aggressions on the first thing they see disagreeing with them: Explanation is NOT condonation! I’m simply explaining what I think I know ipso facto and what ALL the evidence from every angle, shows. Any frustrations detected in my tone are likely due to my inability to communicate simple obvious truths in a way others can immediately comprehend and accept.

I’d agree with you there except that while the game is not the only sandbox/pvp out there, it is still quite unique and as such may need more explanation of the rules that fit their vision and mechanics.

Unfortunately the rules are too simply written and are up for interpretation. They need context and examples and I’m not talking hard block limits.

Clan A can take the time to read the rules as they are, play in the way they’ve understood them (because they are very easily misinterpreted), what exactly have they done wrong other than not understand something not clear?

Clan B reports them and A gets banned… Clan A comes here trying to understand why and they get constantly turned away, left in the dark or given very little context, why shouldn’t they be upset?

My clan and I are not stupid people. Everyone here asking for clarification are not stupid. I think I can sum up and speak for everyone who feels this way that it has not been adequately explained, not all variables have been taken into consideration and they need to make it clear and concise so there is no room for interpretation.

There really is an issue.

3 Likes

I’m not into the name calling game, I’ve defended you specifically in the past for being called a “white knight” by people on this forum. Your rhetoric reads as condescending to me, but that’s no reason to resort to childish name calling.

Yes I agree. You are presenting your interpretation of the rules as if they are most likely the fact of the matter. People are allowed to disagree with you. If you are frustrated that you can’t convince them so easily, perhaps it’s not the case that they are all just stupid, rather your arguments aren’t so compelling.

I reject your representation of the number of players who build outside of one singular location. My experience in CE has lead me to believe it is a far more common occurrence.

We can just agree to disagree amicably. I don’t think the average rational player would infer from the rules that a simple elevator from the beach below up to the jungle obelisk constitutes a ban. I do not think relegating every build that wanders outside of the main base location, regardless of how it effects other players, to a bannable category is reasonable TOS enforcement given how I experience the game.

5 Likes

Oh my, you just made me think for a second – what if Admin is actually a PvPer? NOBODY hates carebear stuff more than a PvP player.

I discovered a QOL bridge that my clanmate had sketched out, spanning a well-known gorge. I chose to improve and build a Community Hub at the end of the bridge. Why?

  1. To get visuals on new players
  2. To command/soft-hold another Obelisk
  3. To draw fire

1/3 of new players will accept help. About half will bristle at the bridge’s proximity to the Stinkhole Ob. The rest are returning PvP players who hate RP shizz.

This is the first thing I deleted.

4 Likes

I can understand the need to keep players from just spreading all over the place carelessly, it’s enforcement needed for server stability. I’ve even been that PvP player complaining about RP shizz on a PvP server before lol. Even I wouldn’t say all “community” or “QOL” builds are necessary bad.

It’s just the hard line stance is where I see the problem. Single base enforcement keeps people from needlessly lagging a server to be sure, but if they are draconian with that enforcement people playing the game in a natural way will get sweep up as well.

Do we really want FC banning a newbie who builds a tiny shack next to the brimstone that’s far away from their base so they can live roving sandstorms that they don’t have masks for yet?

4 Likes

Banning them? No!

Demolishing their shack and sending them a Clan MSG with a warning explaining why? Yes!

This is going to sound even more condescending but I’m already in the shiz now so why not? Here’s a little test, lest’s see if you can pass. If you can then I reject your idea, if you can not then I will give in but also lose all faith in humanity. Here:

If Bob has a base, how many bases does Bob have? _____
If Sally is standing in a spot, how many locations is Sally standing in? _____
If Sally and Bob are in an area, how many areas are Sally and Bob in? _____

Pass your papers in at the end of the class! :stuck_out_tongue:

Ya it’s actually not just condescending but kinda supports how people view your comments pal. You know, considering you’d had to write a disclaimer?

Reading between those lines you really are insinuating that people lack the intelligence to understand - nevermind that FC really has been lax or perhaps do not even know what they’re supposed to put?

Hell, maybe they want this. Starting to seem that way.

2 Likes

Probably true… But I’m not all that smart and I can figure it out so easily it seems like simple common sense. So indeed what does that say about those people who can not?

I believe they do… absolutely! Maybe not the confusion and forum blather, but certainly clearing out people unable or unwilling to comply with their rules on their servers. They say as much directly in the TOS even!

Let’s take usual Terms of Service or Conduct and all the legal stuff that comes with it. Normally ToS and such are much more explanatory because it can be easily misinterpreted by the regular layperson. It is a disservice to customers of any stripe by not making it clear. How could they not though? Building really is a large part of this game in any game mode. The act of building itself is necessary unless you’re on pvp server just to be a solo murder hobo and even that doesn’t last long enough to be “valid”.

In spirit of the most recent topic: there’s absolutely nowhere where it says to only build one base in the ToC. Nothing about not building QoL, nothing about not building outposts. I would feel terrible for generous clans that spent their time to provide public maprooms to be banned for that? I’m always pleased when I join a server and see it.

There is only a small section dedicated to building as it is. They can change the terms at will without notification which forces people to have to re-read it frequently. In addition, they’ve instead worded a portion of the already small area to berating people (haha funny right?).

Your interpretation may be completely incorrect despite your attention to the matter.

Ultimately what I am getting at is I AGREE that people will and should be banned for excessive building. For blocking. For fence stacking. There are those who have knowingly broke the rules and still complain on here and absolutely deserve to be reminded of their own choices that let to their demise. But as you’ve been seeing there are other situations cropping up that go beyond the realm of what appears “obvious” and “common sense”. They don’t seem to warrant a ban - based on the information we’ve been given - despite the condescending performance of picking it all apart to justify this “oh it’s simple” stance. It’s almost like some strange echo chamber with little evidence. What I don’t agree with is that it is simple, cut and dry, laid all out, explained appropriately and well. It’s not.

4 Likes

Because building blind and getting random dev wipes is fun? If they just put actual limitations in place then you won’t have to guess anymore. Have you played on a PvP server where dev wipes are the number 1 tool? I can’t imagine somebody that has not being in favor of this.

Or no. “No” might also be a valid answer to that question.

This might be wishful thinking, but I hope Funcom will eventually confirm whether having more than one base per clan is against TOS or not. If it is, it needs to be clarified in the TOS, because it’s categorically not clear. I’ve been reading this thread, and the idea that people should be able to infer this rule from the fact that Funcom used singular instead of plural is simply not okay. Conan Exiles players span the globe, and not everyone’s grasp of English will be good enough to pick up on grammatical subtleties like that. Hell, even native English speakers might not pick up on this.

So why don’t we ask the question and see whether we get an answer? I apologize for pinging 10 people at once, but it’s for a good cause.

@Community, can we get a confirmation whether it’s against server TOS to have more than one base per clan?

11 Likes

Maybe you will get an answer - you being you and all. But like 15 people have asked this previously and like, five of them included the @Community tag and not a single person was ever answered.

“No” might be a valid answer to that question in the future but currently it’s yes. I say yes for the people who think it’s no and will be banned when/if reported. I personally do not care - like, at all if it’s yes or no. But it’s getting a little tiresome and I’m a bit sad seeing people come in here to complain about their perfect no-fault 3 to 10 satellite (QOL) builds getting admin-wiped - when I know for certain that admins have in the past wiped bases for just that “abuse” on multiple different servers. Official policy or not it has happened…

So I’m like, think whatever you guys like but know this…
If yall don’t wanna get banned…
etc.

All of the circumstances except one, in that bullet list I keep linking are based on actual wipes, many of them multiple wipes on different people/clans from different servers.

1 Like

Well the problem is, clear rules are “lawyered”. The tighter you define them, the more people look for edge cases. Its like when tabletop rpgs and card games added hotlines; when I first heard about it I said “wtf?!l” but then I thought back to all the pedantic rules arguments in every game store I ever visited. I wouldn’t even say the rules aren’t exactly “clear”; I think they are pretty darn clear myself. They amount to “build sparingly because this is a shared space and if you make a nuisance of yourself, we will delete your stuff and ban you”. What they are not is explicit, which I believe is completely intentional. They do not want to argue with people over it. They don’t want a situation where someone says “you said xyz and that I can’t do abc but you didnt say I cant do d-e-f.” We argue about the difference between a merge and a wipe ffs over here!…They want people to use good judgement and anyone caught with bad judgement gets a temporary slap on the wrist and then more later if needed.

4 Likes

But how would you define good vs bad judgement? Based on a few comments and posts here there are claims of “good” judgement but was deemed “bad”. Build sparingly could mean a small main base of operations and a few farming huts for safety :confused: Boiling down to my original point that it’s up for interpretation…