Something has to be done about the massive foundation spam on official servers

Conan Exiles General Discussion
23

It appears you have been reading my posts here and on other game’s forums. I’ve been advocating for just such things since PvE survival games became a thing. Only 7D2D is free from these problems, if on the big map. Map is so big, you just don’t have an issue with it. Plus, the zombies do make you need to repair, a lot.

My favorite way to do this actually involves all three. But I should note that for #3 to work, you would need an area affect on repair hammers, that is significant, or you would restrict how people build. You would have to make sure every last structure piece is exposed, or it would decay with no chance to repair. Area affect on the repair hammer takes care of that.

What I would like to see is an expansion on the idea of PvE-C. If done right, this would be the most popular game mode, and allow for casual and hardcore players to enjoy the game. To do that, many of these concepts would need to be implemented. In short, you use the land claim system to allow for what everyone wants from PvE-C…a base that is safe from attack. Outside of that claim, structures can be destroyed. I will make a suggestion thread to discuss it.

1 Like
24

The problem with PvE is that people often act like they are the only ones playing there. They HATE having neighbors. They spam foundations, turning the landscape into an ugly thing…the ugliest structure in the game, seen everywhere, often blocking tons of resource spawns in the process. IMHO, a Landclaim system could offer each person a reasonably large area to build in, without the need to spam foundations.

I also don’t understand why people play on PvE official, but don’t want neighbors. I mean, do people really not understand that other people really don’t care how nice your base looks? And to be honest, most large bases look like hammered dog crap. Why not play on single player if a person wants to build massive bases, with no neighbors nearby? Because they want people to see what they build. But nobody actually cares. To be honest, you can get the same effect, just posting your base on YouTube, or Reddit, or here.

Others like the idea of others being around…just not within site. Two guys were fighting over the ponds north of Sepermeru, and west of Klael’s Stronghold. The guy who held the west side ended up letting his base decay. So now the guy who had the east side, is taking over the whole area. This area is bigger than one grid. One person is literally taking over an area bigger than a whole grid, and blocking many many spawns in the process. I had a temp base nearby, but knew I would move as soon as possible, because both were blocking so many spawns…eggs, mini-boss, glowing goop, aloe, metal, coal, etc… Then some idiot started building in Shattered Springs, but thankfully, he left the server.

The fix is simple. Eliminate PvE. Make it PvE-C and expand on the concept. Structures build inside the claim are safe, but those outside the claim, can be destroyed. You see many map rooms on PvP servers. People leave them along because they ARE a resource for everyone. But, having destructible structures outside the claim, allows the community to deal with nuisance builders. It also allows YOU to deal with somebody who is griefing you by building in an aggressive way. It would in fact, eliminate it. People build like that on PvE because they know they can. Imagine being able to use a Treb from inside your claim, to destroy a grief build by your claim. Somebody trying to block a pathway to your claim? Wait till they aren’t on, and take your Treb out an destroy it. Combat timers wouldn’t be necessary. Combat could be 24/7.

3 Likes
25

Yes, damn it, yes! This right here is my dream. All of it.

…sorry for gushing…

1 Like
27

Okay, okay, not all of it. The part about getting rid of PVE was unnecessary. Just transform PVE-C into … what he said. :wink:

3 Likes
28

:wink:

I mean, the reason most people play PvE is to be able to build without being destroyed. But yeah, I guess there are some people who just simply can’t stand even losing a fight in the open.

But I would be fine with PvE-C being this way. I refuse to play PvE, and am actually getting tired of the PvE-C because everyone is simply playing PvE on the server I am on.

I want a PvE-C server that allows you a safe base, but gives you a reason to go out and fight.

1 Like
29

Without base destruction there isn’t any reason to go out and fight.

If nothing is at risk, then you have nothing to lose by just logging out and ignoring anyone who would challenge you to a fight.

I play on a pve-c server and I just ride around on my horse killing people on sight, obviously the whole server hates me to the point where someone tried to build a gigantic wall around my base which is almost takes up an entire tile.

The fact is that people who play on pve-c really don’t like the -c part. I made a great many people quit the server because they died and I looted them, which is part of the game. It’s so silly because you can’t “wipe” someone from a server; there are only small defeats on a pve-c server, but never complete destruction.

30

100% not true.

Uhm…what? We are talking about not having to worry about your base being destroyed simply because you aren’t high enough level to protect it, or aren’t even online. If somebody tries to fight you in the world, and you log off, they just kill you and take your stuff.

It is up to the game devs to create things to fight over, in the world. It’s time for them to start thinking outside the box. Too many fall back on the base defense thing, but that’s dumb, especially when you could actually be locked out of the server, while your base is being demolished, or when there is such disparity between somebody who has been on the server for a while, and somebody who is fairly new. Sorry, but it isn’t my job to create game content for you, and I won’t do it anymore. I’ve seen my last day on a PvP server. I play a lot, but not enough to keep up with people who have no life, other than one game.

31

The problem is that people want something to fight over, not just one on one fights. The real problem is that there are a lot of people on PvP servers, that don’t belong there, but they want something to fight over. Most don’t belong on PvP servers, because they have no chance of defending their base from being raided.

Atlas Ship vs Ship on some Unofficial servers was what a game should be. Sure, it sucks to lose your ship, but what is the point of building a ship with cannons on it, if you aren’t going to fight it. The beauty of it was that you didn’t have to fight it when you didn’t want to. Trying to get a ship fully upgraded? Don’t take it out of port. Use other burner ships. Use those to farm the Ships of the Damned, etc… Keep the ship you want to go hunting with, when it is fully upgraded, in port, until it’s fully upgraded.

And this allows the game to mirror a more realistic situation. You didn’t just roll up to a port, with fortifications, and just methodically take it apart. In real life, fortifications gave you a big edge. In survival games, they really don’t. The Devs are simply relying on you to create game content for other players to blow through. I’m done doing that.

32

It’s not just that. There are people who simply aren’t interested in any kind of conflict with other players – I played like that for most of the time – and who happen to play on a server without trolls. Removing a whole game mode is unnecessary. PVE players would just have to understand and accept the tradeoffs.

People play like that on the PVE-C server I’m on, too. And that’s fine. I don’t really have a problem with that, generally. Most of the people on that server are nice people and it’s nice to coexist with them.

Problem is, when I run into people that aren’t like that, there’s nothing I can really do. Sure, it’s a PVE-C server and if I run into them, I could attack them and maybe even kill them. But so what? That doesn’t mean anything to anyone who knows their way around the game. And if they get pissy, they can retaliate in ways that are impossible to counter.

Also, it would be much more interesting and exciting to have a game mode that gives some kind of incentive for conflict without making you risk everything.

A reason would be awesome. But I don’t really need the game to provide me with a reason – that’s what other players are all too happy to do, sooner or later :wink:

I would settle for a server that allows me a safe base and gives me means to fight in a meaningful way. So, for example, if some chucklefuсk decides to build a pyramid right on top an important resource, I can try diplomacy first and then, when that fails, burn it down to the ground and salt the earth :stuck_out_tongue:

33

I’d love the “-C part”, but without “complete destruction”. I wouldn’t mind if someone mounted an attack to destroy my fishing outpost or volcano workshop or one of the convenience wheels. But if I have to take my kid to his RSM classes one day and then I come back to find that some butthurt clown wiped out everything I had? No, thanks.

I did consider, at one point, doing what you said – start fresh on a new server, keep to myself and just attack anyone on sight, but I guessed I would’ve gotten the same reaction: let’s wall this guy in.

Of course, it matters how you do it. I never had any problem with people who attacked me. I would either fight or run away and no hard feelings. But there are people who would take running away poorly and then get douchy on global, like I was under some kind of obligation to stay and fight them any time they wanted. If you happen to have that kind of attitude, I don’t blame them for reacting the way they did :wink:

34

That’s what PvE is for. People who go to PvE-C are looking for something in between PvP and PvE. For these players, PvE seems boring. No point in it. They want something to fight over. They just don’t want it to be their base, because in PvP, getting raided means losing all your stuff. Getting wiped means you are back to square one.

That’s great if you have no life. But for those who don’t have dozens of hours each week to play, they need to not have to worry about getting set back, just because they couldn’t play that day.

This means it is up to the Devs to find a way to do both. Make it such that you have a safe build zone, but also have something to fight over. Even if that something is just bragging rights. I suggested a Team King of the Hill concept. You can build there, but other people will try to topple you. There has to be a reason to build there, however. A reason to build a second base on that spot. Maybe doing so grants you favor from your god, and so your resource gathering is twice what others have.

35

You would be surprised. Do you have any idea just how many people end up on PVE-C because they have no clue what “-C” stands for? :laughing:

Yeah, that’s another way to do it. Make parts of the map “safe” and the rest of the map has building destruction turned on. Put something valuable there that requires building a base. Kinda like the vespene gas in StarCraft – can’t just harvest it with your units, gotta build on top. Make sure there’s no “vespene gas” in the safe portions of the map.

The problem with that idea is that the safe regions will have the exact same problem you see now: you’ll want to build your main base in the safe region, but that means that some douche canoe can build an invulnerable wall around it.

This is why I prefer the claim totem idea – that way each player has to choose whether they want to keep their own base safe or be a dick to someone else :stuck_out_tongue:

36

I would not use safe areas. The safe area is the bubble created by your homestead structure. This could be a flag, or some other structure. This creates a circle you must build inside of. In Atlas, when they did that, you could see the circle if you turned on that option. You could also see the circle when you were about to place the flag. This way you knew where you could build, and where you could not.

edit: so only you can build inside that structure. Anything built outside of it, could be destroyed.

37

Well being walled in isn’t an issue for me, if you build your base correctly, it’s impossible to be 100% walled in.

If you want to see how mad I’ve made these people, just come check out 1517. The fact is that i’m usually pretty respectful, but it shouldn’t be any suprise to you that people don’t like being looted.

1 Like
38

Okay, but then make it impossible to place the flag in the “king of the hill” zone :slight_smile:

Also, a fixed radius has its pros and cons. The way I see it, the pros are: 1) you don’t have to bother with upkeep mechanics, and 2) it would lead to interesting base architecture. The major con is that there is no flexibility involved. An alternative is to combine the upkeep mechanics with the claim flag, something along the lines of the claim totem I once proposed.

It’s funny how the claim flag mechanic keeps popping up. It’s been proposed before and it keeps being proposed. I still keep a slim hope that Funcom is reading this stuff and that one day they might implement something like it.

39

A question arises though as to how a “capture the flag” game mechanic jives with Conan. While it may work to resolve a winner, how does Conan invoke capturing a flag? Conan is slaughter and conquer. This can be a huge problem on Funcom’s side of the ball. How to stay true to Conan as the core to the game and still resolve PVP issues?

40

Maybe I wasn’t paying enough attention, but I can’t recall seeing anyone propose CTF as the mechanic. I would agree that’s a bad idea. But I think it’s the word “flag” that makes it sound like that. That’s why I prefer something like “totem” or “standard” or some other word.

I think people tend to use the word “flag” because of the Battle Standard in CE, but maybe I’m wrong.

41

hell naw

Because they want to socialize with others, Officials are pretty much the default option, and they want to be able to enjoy a scenic view of (and from) their base without seeing someone else’s build. Heck, I spent ages on an Official because I was leery of the time-investment and additional responsibility that would be involved with admining my own server when I’m already a sys admin for a living.

But why not play on a private, you might ask? Well, since the main factor that led me to forsake an Official was a lack of agency where gameplay decisions were concerned, picking someone else’s private and hoping for the best wasn’t a particularly compelling option either. For others who are similarly leery of living by someone else’s standards and lack the money, free-time, inclination, or expertise, you might understand why such folks would pick to play on an Official server.

3 Likes
42

@CodeMage I think a building perms/upkeep banner system and/or a CTF-type game mode for the new map could solve a lot of the issues we see on official pvp servers. But both are pretty massive coding projects and likely aren’t feasible in the near term for the current map. I shared this with @darthphysicist in the wiki discord but for those reading here, I’ve previously designed and ran a super detailed CTF game mode for a private server using capture totems: http://bit.ly/cascadedomination. It was a fascinating experience, but didn’t pan out in the long run due to some admin issues. I also recognize that you’d have to create plenty of new safeguards against exploits and gaming the system if you tried to create this as a non moderated experience. Darth, about your comment about jiving with the slaughter and conquer side of Conan I’d argue that 1) ideal would be having CTF as a different menu option like pve-c launched with fresh servers on the new map, and 2) if that’s not technically feasible then I still stand behind it as aligned with the spirit of Conan-- you still will have intense and likely savage raids for those who want that, but with this there’s at least an end goal in the end game. Alphas get bored and non alphas get stomped and frustrated. Both often just stop playing conan. You need some sort of goal and opportunity to grow/improve/design new strategies etc.

1 Like
43

I think you highlight the problem with people’s perceptions of this mechanic. Why does the circle have to be small? Why can’t it be huge? I mean, it could literally be the size of a grid square. Who needs more than a grid square? Yet people do spam areas that size. They can even give you the option to make it smaller, if you know you aren’t going to build that big, and don’t mind neighbors. Also, if you don’t like where it is, you can pull it up, and place it in another spot.

The mechanic could work like this. You plant the flag. Then, you go to the map, and you see a circle indicating your territory. You can then make it smaller through the +/- keys. Later, you can make it bigger, if you choose, but only if somebody else does not already own the area that the increase would claim. Being able to pull up the flag, and place it in another location, would allow you to increase the size, while avoiding the other person’s claim.

Also, there can be a lot of feedback on the map. Why not allow you to see the circle when you simply have the flag in hand, ready to be placed. You see the circle. Any part of the circle that is invalid, meaning it is overlapping somebody’s claim, or ghost fence, or no build zones, would show up in the circle as red. By allowing you to actually see what is obstructing you, and what it is, you can move away from that obstruction, or reduce the size of your circle.

Of course, there would need to be a maximum size to the circle, and also a minimum.

This could also be done by clan size, if they wish, but not sure that is really needed.

The point here is that people are already claiming areas that big. And this would solve so many other problems. Like the person who set their horse to guard in an area I want to build, and then never came back. Since the decay for animals and thralls seems to be broken, I may never be able to build there. I have seen thralls from decayed bases that are still around 4 months later.