Just now… 6 of the first ten I looked at. And that’s a typical average…
Anyway, I’ve said all my ideas and corrected my initial error… I guess this is OT enough that I shouldn’t turn it into an exhaustive back & forth. 
1 Like
Like I said - I checked after you said it, and found it to be true on the first page I checked. I wasn’t disputing the statement - I was answering the question. I have never noticed it on any page for a game I have actually chosen to look at - but I wouldn’t care either way even if it was there, so it’s just as plausible that I wouldn’t have noticed. 
1 Like
LOL!!! I only read the “Nope - literally never once seen it.” part and then went directly to Steam. Hehehhee… Sry! 
Funny thing about averages is that they depend heavily on the sample you’re averaging 
My recommendations on Steam are drastically different from yours and the average is also different. But when I compare your sample with mine, the mystery solves itself: all the games from your screenshots were released in late 2021 or in this very month.
In short: it’s a new trend. Even if we disregard your optimism and my pessimism about PVP players’ reactions, it’s not really clear whether Conan Exiles would benefit from this.
Don’t get me wrong, though: I would personally love to see the devs’ sit down and play, should they choose to do it and share it with us.
1 Like
Well a little back&forth I guess then…
If Farming Sim 22 and Monster Hunter are “new games” then So is Conan Exiles 2.8. 
Or at least 3.0 when it comes…
And yes, I said it was a new trend… only a year or two - roughly. Some companies did so, it was shown to be a huge boon, and now many are doing it.
No worries, lol - easily done when we’re busy disagreeing about stuff (And I have always said you should call me out if you think I’m wrong on something - though I did warn you how rare that might be 
)
Bah! If other companies walked off a cliff, should Funcom do it? Lol (I’m aware this is a terrible argument - I think I’m too tired for more of the sensible stuff, I’ve been up since 4am )
1 Like
It’s 4am where you are? Cool! Similar time zone! It’s 3:35am in Japan right now. (I’m supposed to be working actually - LOL) You down-under?
No no - I got up at 4 am - it’s now coming up towards 7 pm (UK) - that’s why I’m starting to make less sense lol
2 Likes
The reason for the OP was to allow a bit of middle ground between decorative and combat functional with mind on balance. Struts could be used by have limits on amounts used a with everything. I am not a fan of infinite additions of stability via struts as that doesn’t make physical sense as it would have to factor in many weight and leverage issues .
I wonder is some building piece with the attachement points could be created with this piece also having a low HP so it would not be functional as a defense piece.
1 Like
I would settle for Funcom making the new anti-stacking logic conditional, so that it’s enabled if the server setting “can damage player owned structures” is on. Or alternately, give it its own server setting.
Of course, that depends on how the anti-stacking logic works in the first place. If it’s some kind of a volume attached to that building piece, then what I’m proposing can’t be done (easily).
Ah, who cares. They won’t do anything about this anyway… 
5 Likes
You have no idea how many threads I’ve said that to myself about. Most for sure!
5 Likes
I would also be nice if we could have this brought up in a developer stream explaining if or not a change can be done in this regard. Information over silence is usually received better by playersbases of games.
1 Like
And you don’t think Funcom doesn’t have such things like literally every video game company out there already?
If Funcom felt like forcing (you “demanded” after all) their dev teams to be paraded out in front of this community (of all communities) is the best way to ‘drum up interest’, they would.
WAY too high of expectations. WAY too high. I can’t even put into words how much facepalm this makes me do.
Forgive me for this CodeMage, but here’s an idea…make it moddable…which it already is…(that I may or may not have created a toggle for in my LBPR mode already due to player votes on my discord)
Yuppers, that’s what it is. Well and some additional code logic to go with it, but ya. I still don’t see why its a huge deal for decorating to lose this though. I had to be overwhelming convinced to even start looking at a mod toggle for it.
My point still stands. If people want to decorate using exploitative methods, official servers are not the place to do it.
1 Like
Heh, no need to apologize, but I personally don’t think that’ll be of much comfort to the few people affected who happen to play on official servers and/or consoles.
Well, crap. Thanks for confirming that.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but for me it’s not a huge deal in and of itself. I’ve used this technique in some builds, but none that are still standing, and it’s not really crucial.
I’m mostly pissed off because of the precedent it sets, because there are other advanced building techniques – “exploitative”, if you insist on a loaded term – that I do care for a lot more.
For example, the ability to snap one foundation to another but 1/8th of a foundation height lower. What if the PVP players start abusing that one next? Funcom starts banning them, they come here to complain and instead of taking responsibility for abusing the gameplay mechanic they ask for it to be removed. And guess what, it might get removed too.
Tell that to console players participating in the building contests. I would say that if people want to abuse emergent gameplay mechanics, official servers are not the place to do it. 
1 Like
As a software developer, you will know that high-aspiring programmers (like Joel) have a standard. He definitively said on a number of occasions “these are the ways we did not intend for you to play.”
For other software, depending on the ToS or the EULA, the developer may be obligated to fix an unintended use of their product. For instance, all my Adobe software includes a measure of “professional responsibility” on behalf of the developers, in exchange for our diligence as Creative Cloud Members. We report the bugs, they fix 'em.
The exploitation of a game system should necessitate a fix to an unintended game mechanism. I would think a more moderate view would ascribe less blame to the exploiter, with the big picture in mind.
As for the Dev PvP: a lot of the promotional footage from Launch and post-Launch are from epic team battles. It would not be a stretch, or a bad thing, to see them do this again. I got to see a few outtakes and it was supremely hilarious, in all the best ways.
1 Like
There’s a concept I’ve learned about a long time ago – from a book that still has a special place in my library – called emergent gameplay.
Many games try to deliberately incorporate emergent gameplay. In fact, there are genres that are based on it. However, unintended emergent gameplay is just as prevalent, if not more.
We’ve all heard the old chestnut that goes “it’s not a bug, it’s a feature”, but as far as I can tell, games are the only kind of software where this kind of thing is actually desirable.
I don’t think it’s fair to automatically characterize all unintentional emergence as undesirable, just because there is a fraction of the playerbase that will actively seek to abuse it.
Especially because there are already mechanisms established to deal with abuses. That’s what server moderation was supposed to be about, wasn’t it?
I’m already ascribing less blame to the exploiter than most people would, at least in this particular case, because their exploits were tacitly tolerated and the decision to stop tolerating them wasn’t communicated properly.
I see nothing “moderate”, nor indeed desirable, in denying the agency of those exploiters or, for that matter, completely absolving them of the responsibility for their choices.
Abusing a game mechanism is a choice. If we insist that Funcom must implement additional logic every time people choose to abuse a gameplay mechanism and refuse to take responsibility, we’re asking that the devs spend the majority of their effort budget on further restricting gameplay instead of expanding and improving it.
Case in point: do you think Funcom should implement a check that disallows placing torches too densely?
3 Likes
I am a fan of a fellow called Game Maker’s Toolkit, and he introduced me to the responsibility devs have to save players from themselves. His arbiter of what makes a healthy game rides on a narrow continuum of traits.
One of these is how agile the developer is with the capping off or prevention of exploits. The fundamental thing that sets Conan Exiles apart is that it was developed using Early Access Catch 22s – you must earn while you churn. This made the Launch product full of holes that required a lot of spackle, and a ton of PR to repair.
These weren’t just on the PvP side, undermeshing was all the rage for PvE griefers for a time. Or getting past the Green Wall, glitches are haves vs have nots sorts of inequities, and as you mentioned in microcosm state the game is a portrait of the society that plays it. It is incumbent on the game maker to create an environment where the player is not rewarded for illicit behavior.
Truly, if this is fixed as cleanly as Multi says it is, we have very few nagging build exploits to fix. This is a good day for us. I would be opposed to more building points outside of @Multigun’s excellent Mode. (sp)
ETA, missed it
To be heartlessly honest with you, I was b@tching about this the first time I got banned on Steam. There should have been checks or limiters or lumen-meters or something from the get-go. I am extremely sensitive to bad lighting/strobes, and with the bottle lag torches used to cause it could spiral into a cluster headache for a half a day.
1 Like
If you had actually read what I said you would not have written either one of those sentences!
Video or it didn’t happen! 
I just can’t wait for this update and to break half my base.
The last nail in the coffin if this happens.
I was just chuckling with my Captain last night, after my Frost Ob building was finally swiss cheesed by meteorites. “The best raid is a Funcom raid.” He laughed and told me to get busy repairing the Map.
Yesterday I was investigating some of our bases built by other clan members. There’s a whole section of a fortress squeezed into a smaller space using stacking. I can’t help but think the whole thing will just cascade off the hill. Built in May, 2021.
Once again, I like the system the way it is now, with no additional attachment points.