For PvE Servers only. What is the number of followers the PvE servers should have?
50 + 20, (250) for example.
I believe each server type should have different follower rules for their own player base. What are your thoughts on the matter?
I do not mind a cap of 200. Currently my clan has over 300 (although the number shrinks every so often when I break a few bonds here and there). Yes, my clan has too many thanks to one clan mate. We were a clan of 9 active players.
My proposal would be 50 + 15 (Cap would be 200 if there is a clan of 10 on PvE servers) 65 for a single player.
I can understand and appreciate people’s opinions on how more followers slow things down. But…
I play Solo on official Xbox PVE & have over 100 followers divided between 2 main bases on the map.
I agree with a cap limit, but I think it should be based on “Area” and not total.
Nothing worse then coming across someone’s base and they have all their Thralls & 100s of failed Pets just all standing around.
Not sure if they could cap an area the number of thralls. Interesting idea but I would foresee lot of re-programming and more unintended issues in trying to program that versus the system they have in place already.
Only thing they need to do at the moment is turn on the feature on Official servers and input 2 numbers. Number a clan starts with (50 for example) and a second number for each player in the clan (25 for example which will increase the clan number by 25 for each member, so a clan of 5 will have 50 + 5 x 25 = 175)
Private servers already have this feature since late 2019. They just never turn the feature on Official servers before.
Let’s be reasonable here: the system is already implemented as it is, and they’re figuring out the concrete numbers. They’re not going to throw it all away and implement a completely different system at this point.
When they announced they were working on it, there was a big uproar in the community. It wasn’t just senseless yelling and name-calling, there were also suggestions for how they could implement it differently. One of those was the idea to cap the overall density of the followers (regardless of the ownership), rather than the number of followers per clan.
They didn’t act on those suggestions back then. I’m pretty sure they won’t do it now, either.
I just hope that they don’t get cold feet again and decide not to activate the cap. There are official servers that really, really need it.
Please note the (n + n) is something they already built in the game and is being used by private servers.
And broken fighters, etc, would need to be addressed of course, but this is a game mechanic that will just be turned on for official servers as they have mentioned in the last 2 dev streams (and originally mentioned in 2019). Its believe that this will increase a bit of the performance on the servers.
Option 1: The # of thralls (to fully defeat all waves of a T4 purge) /2 = Cap# (for each player)
Option 2: Upper server limit /player slots = Cap# (for each player)
The exact numbers need to come from the Devs.
If server performance is still an issue, thralls “leave” when the player logs off for an hour, then comeback when the player logs in.
My suggestion is how to get to that “magical” cap number, it doesn’t change or touch what is already implemented to turn it on.
Just to clarify, are you suggesting (N + 0)? In other words, give every clan (and clanless players) the same cap, regardless of how many people in the clan?
Yes. Thinking ahead about some issues: If you accept me to join your clan, and we are both at the cap, I can vault my thralls (with a cool down) this way we can replace the ones lost in battle, etc.
Now, as background I did read some posts on the subject (nice to see very passionate individuals on the forum) and the Funcom proposal that’s not bad.
A full clan will have a maximum limit of 100 placed Followers total.
Since a clan with a single member can be created the same cap should apply to all.
Now, is this number based on server load & performance? I can accept it since, it’s a “real” measurement that benefits all players in the server.
Here’s the thing: unlike PVP servers, PVE(-C) servers are missing the typical incentives to form a clan. The biggest benefit of being in a clan is that you have someone to refresh your buildings when you’re on vacation (or otherwise unable to play). The second biggest benefit is that you can get purges more easily, although that’s not an issue on the Isle of Siptah anymore. The rest of the benefits are minor: you have the clan chat, you can trade with your clanmats even when they’re offline, etc.
All in all, finding clanmates is harder on PVE(-C) servers because most people want to live in their own bases and do their own thing and being in a clan brings very few tangible benefits.
That’s why my suggestion on @Sir.Henry.Vale’s PVE-C thread was the polar opposite of what you asked for: instead of N+0, I’m proposing 0+M. That would eliminate the problem of people not wanting to form a clan (or merge clans) because of the follower cap.
Of course, I would be perfectly content with your N+0 suggestion – or any suggestion – if Funcom added the feature that lets you pick up your followers.
Unfortunately, they are most likely not going to do that. It would require a substantial (or even massive) amount of work on the follower system and it would have a really, really bad impact on the game database. I could go into details about why, but I’m not going to do that unless people are really curious.
So given that we’re probably never going to be able to pick up our followers, I respectfully disagree with the N+0 suggestion. It’s hard enough to find clanmates as it is.
I see your point, I can’t speak to the technical aspects of it but, if the main issue is clan incentives to determine the thrall cap then the clan system needs improvement.
So, I still stand by the same cap for all, based on the server performance. I understand that this something that may not scale, if the software it self is not able to take advantage of additional resources.