I have something i want to say and that is that with every patch/update Funcom have gone the pvp players way. And so with this thrall limit. if you read the reason for this it is mostly so the landclaim IN PVP servers will be tougher, In pve it doesnt matter, i can single handed with 1 follower kill of all purge enemies. So the patch are only for pvp players.
They say it will reduce lag, maybe, but very little. before 2.3-2.4 there were no lag on my siptah server, we had a lot of buildings and thrall, but after the patches with over 40 villages incl npc’s the lag started immediately. When more then 12-13 players log on my ping starts to raise.
Me as pve player, when i have gotten all crafters and fighters, the only thing left is to build and get thralls for decoration to put out.
After this Thrall limit update Funcom can get rid of ALL cubs, kittens & rhinos, elephants etc. No use of it now.
I will prob get my own siptah server (i have an exile alread) and try to get so many players from official to it, with no thrall limit.
Like i wrote, i collect them for decoration purposes only when i have done all in the game, building is the only thing left to do and for those buildings i put out thralls like statists. I have made an zoo with all animals in the game but that i have to delete now.
Precisely. Officials are shared, and whether intentional or not, placing personal zoos and civilization armies is a very negative effect on servers, both processing and generally aesthetically to new players who see this and leave asap
I didnt say it was easier in pvp, i said it was the pvp community who complain about not being able to take forts cause of all thralls. Funcom said that this limited thrall thing will stop landclaim & ppl building all over. That only apply on pvp servers. So thats why i say that all updates made in the game are for pvp servers/players only. And it is us pve players that will suffer for that.
In the end collecting thralls is the only thing to do for your buildings after you played and have everything.
Ppl dont leave because of this, they leave for they have another games to play, they ahve done all in conan and there is nothing else for them to do. Most of the ppl on my server left because of that or the free to play week has ended.
While not pleasing everyone, I think the soft / hard cap system is fair. 1 player = 65 / 165 to the 10 player clan 200 / 300 (average 20 per player in the clan at soft cap)
For official servers this limit is reasonable for a single player and the clans. It is more than I had expected (did not expect a hard cap system). If this reduces lag for some players, great. Followers, unlike building pieces, do not decay easily. I seen a former base near my base decay and the followers are still there for months. The player either forgot about them or it belong to another clan member, which I have no idea. So they can be refreshed easily, when a player of the clan logs back in.
I have no issues with the concept of all followers refresh since any other method will be logistical nightmare, but does leave sometimes a mess somewhere on the map unfortunately. Personally, this does not bother me that followers are left there but for others I am sure it does after a long period.
Because number of players x render is low. The reason servers start lagging when high pop, is because each player may in areas where they are rendering alot of server resources. The 2 are intertwined. to get high pop servers they have to reduce variable of what can render, thus thrall caps.
I understand what you are saying but my point is that it was the implement of villages that made the server start to lag. 20 players before 2.3 no lag 20 players after, laaaag.
I know that they want more ppl to join the servers so instead of getting better servers that can handle all things they implement into the servers they (like allways) take the easiest way, reduce thralls.
Then you were lucky, scan the forums to see lag has been a day 1 issue for many officials. And lag is tied to client side as much as server. But Funcom has all the data, and they know what is some solvable things they can do to make it less laggy. Just because we want to do something 9n a server, doesn’t mean it is best interest of the whole servers community. Official multi-player servers are bound to the social contract, and when that is not being self mitigated by thinking of others, then Funcom will step in and create a mechanic that forces it to some extent. Players couldn’t control themselves on placing thralls, so a cap was created.
Ok Biggcane, i must mention that i am playing on a Siptah server where there were no villages at all before 2.3 (again no lag). I know that on Exile map servers there have been lag all the time and on those servers the villages was, not sure but from start.
OK. I knownwhat you are saying. You are talking of the NPC camps,/cities. If so, then yes introducing those added ai to server. But many wanted this change because the server felt bare. Me not so much, as it at least felt different than exiles. But once they trashed the whole surge mechanic to go back to camps for named, they had to add areas. I agree, before it was less laggy.
If i understand it right this game was made for ppl to build not like other mmorpg games. So they made the pets for a reason i guess, so ppl could use them. But i will say again, it is the pvp players who is complaining most about this thrall thingy. It lag when they gona siege a fort.
And if they gona make building limits they are making the game opposite what it was intented for from start.
another thing, i have 5 preservation boxes full with animals which i dont wanna put out in the game
False. The reason why they’re doing this is almost at the top of their post about it, so it should be impossible to miss, yet here we are:
So no, the main motivation is not to manage the land claim on PVP servers.
Heh, I’d like to see you go through a Cimmerian Berserker purge with only 1 follower, no help from other players, no damage to any of your buildings, and your follower still alive.
Maybe on your particular server. There are plenty of servers out there that are absolutely choked with excessive followers.
Which should tell you that it’s pretty damn critical to control the total amount of AI running on the server, which means that the follower cap is a necessary measure. “Siptah was running much smoother when there were no settlements” is a really poor argument against the follower cap.
I keep seeing this, too. That’s just FUD from people who can’t adapt. Plenty of us will still want to use pets for different purposes, just without excess.
As others pointed out, if your zoo puts you over the cap, then you’re part of the problem. Every server is a shared resource, and official servers are shared with minimal moderation. This means that either the players have to be “good neighbors” and be conscious of how their actions might impact the whole server, or that Funcom has to set up a system that limits what players can do on official servers. I guess the players, inn aggregate, have proven that they don’t care about being good neighbors.
False. They said that in addition to their main motivation, this should also make it harder to defend huge claims:
They never said it would stop it.
Actually, it doesn’t. Just because they mentioned PVP, doesn’t mean that overbuilding and massive claims aren’t a problem on PVE. Follower limit is a step in the right direction for PVE overbuilding problems, too: if you don’t have unlimited thralls, you can’t build a bloody road polluting all of the map and defend it from a Cimmerian Berserker purge or a Sobek purge.