Two ideas for dealing with foundation spam

So, two ideas for dealing with the massive amounts of lands spam on servers.

Why is it done? Well, players use it as a defense against Trebuchets and summoning of Avatars.

How do you solve this problem? Two methods IMHO -

  1. Allow the placement of bed rolls, Avatar summoning, Trebuchets within land claim areas.
  2. Implement a “foundation block” and limit the scale of building…Say…100 foundation radius. Any other construction without a foundation block chosen (there should only be one allowed) will be limited to something like, 25 block radius? It would also have a rapid decay timer.

Both of these methods would make it unnecessary (or unable) to land spam and force clans to actually defend their bases and actually make people play against players, not against structures. True attack and defend battles. Although, this would also have to happen when offline raid protection is enabled.

2 Likes

100% agree, but wouldn’t players build and stack foundations in a way that trebuchets can’t be placed? Like uneven ground?

Don’t think I understand this one? 100 foundation radius to? The main part of the base? Or a bench?

Maybe PvP should have a flag system, you can only build within the flag area of llke 50x50 tiles. Every 5 players in a clan allows for another flag to build a base, but only allow a base 50 tiles away from the other flag.

Or maybe give each clan 1 mainbase flag which allow to build in a 50x50 area, and give them also 3 outpost flags which allow 25x25 tiles, same rules apply.

(this doesn’t mean land claim, other clans can still build inside the 50x50 radius if for example your base is 10x10… the flag vanishes when the buildings in the locations are destroyed for like 80%).

The numbers are just a baseline, 50x50 is maybe a little on the small size.

The idea isn’t ideal for a limitless building sandbox game but I think every PvP player will have a better time enjoying the game how it should be.

Not able to place trebuchets makes it like a broken feature.

Heck… I won’t even mind if they will use this feature for PvE as well… no more foundation spam is better than limitless building in PvE as well.

3 Likes

For many freedom reasons I believe that the only solution is Zendesk. No matter if it is pvp, Zendesk tickets for land claim should act. All these solutions will just give more advantage to old players.
Pvp needs solutions for new comers, not old players.
Pvp must be even, the most possible at least , from 0 level.
It is already too easy for an old clan to crush all the new comers.
This creates toxicity because of the frustration of the new players.
Then the old players come here to complain about empty servers, the ones they are responsible for the emptiness.
They were happy only if they made the other players to leave the server 🤦🏼.
So pvp needs a lot of polish or…
Seperation.
Old players should not be able to play with new.
There should be servers only for new players and when the new are dominating then to leave this server for a harder one. Something like a ranking system.
New players deserve to play this option a bit lighter in the beginning and not necessarily to private servers.
They should create servers, ranking servers that will allow you to play for a month and the dominator wins and rank to a bigger class, so the next month will play with equal ranked players on another server.
They could also separate solo pvp from clan pvp, so solo pvp players will enjoy it too.
This is one of the greatest games ever done, it just needs more people, new people.
Don’t you think?

2 Likes

Yeah and I’m sure if the servers were more beefy the players will stay longer
Most of the reasons I read in the reviews (during free week mostly) are players that tried it but quit because of unplayable lag, the lag is terrible when its busy, some of them blame bugs like not able to gather trees, which can also be lag related, or AI that doesn’t work or react slow.

2 Likes

@prologue1337 , True, it is much of a console player issue than pc on this one. We have a lot of issues, especially on ps4 that wouldn’t really attract people, yet. This is what we “think”. Tbh, I tried other survival games with lower requirements and still they had issues too, a lot. But ps5 is on the way, one day I will be able to enjoy CE properly again. Now for me everything is known and I can avoid or skip bugs and lags, for a new player it will be difficult, but this was the beauty of the game always, if you don’t like difficulty, don’t play Conan :wink:

1 Like

That’s how they use it on PVP servers. There are plenty of people who use claim spam on PVE(-C) servers, and they do it for a different purpose: they don’t want anyone building “close” to them.

I mention this, because the rest of your suggestion tries to deal with the claim spam from the PVP point of view, which means it misses the PVE side of things.

For one thing – and you mentioned this yourself – you would need offline protection implemented (and working) in the game. For another, @prologue1337 already pointed out that this could potentially exacerbate the claim spam problem, by making people spam more and unevenly, so you don’t have a good spot for your treb.

This sounds like the “claim flag” mechanics. I’m not necessarily against it, per se, but am leery of what effect it would have on PVE. Remember, Funcom rarely implements code changes that are exclusive to one mode. Instead, they try to spend their effort on something that is a decent enough fit for all modes.

As far as I’m concerned, I think that having a claim flag would be a good solution if it worked something like this:

  • There is a fixed allotment of claim flags per player and/or per clan.
  • One claim flag covers a specific fixed radius by default.
  • Players would be able to expand the radius of a claim flag and/or get additional claim flags, but that would require them to keep paying upkeep cost that would be a function of these “extensions”.
  • Only the clan that owns the claim flag can build within the area covered by the claim flag effect. Everyone can build outside the effect.
    • Nobody can build within the no-build zones defined by the map, regardless of claim flags.
    • The intersection of the claim flag effect with a no-build zone should be clearly visible while you’re deciding where to place the flag.
  • The decay timer for things built by a clan outside their claim flag zones should be a fraction of what it would normally be.

I feel like this would cover both PVP and PVE concerns, and would tackle several problems at once.

Still, a feature like that would probably be extremely costly in terms of development effort, would be a source of many :bug:“happy little accidents” :bug:, and would still not remove the need for actual server rules, because players can be really inventive about being dicks. :man_shrugging:

That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to see something like that. I’m just trying to be realistic.

2 Likes

Yeah, the lag is a machine issue. I’m on PS5 and hardly ever notice lag. It’s rare but not gone. The code of this game is massive and it uses a lot of memory. So, lag issues seem to be dependent on age and power of their systems. On PS4 my lag was horrible. Especially, when we were getting raided. It was physically impossible to fight back. On PS5…Not so much. Also, I found that it works even better when you move it to the console as opposed to using an exented drive.

So what you would do is select and tag your central “foundation stone” block. Then from there, you’d have 100 foundations radius around that stone.

IMHO, a clan would only be allowed to have ONE foundation stone. IF they were to build a outpost base or a thrall wheel outside of that radius the decay timer would be much much shorter AND they’d be limited to say 25 foundation radius.

True and this is why the “foundation stone” method is the version I prefer. Think of the Thrall pot. You place it down, and it covers a radius. The difference is that the radius for the “foundation stone” would be much larger. This would eliminate foundation spam completely as anything outside of the radius would decay at an increased rate and, if I had it my way, constantly take damage that would require constant repair. Additional “bases” would not be able to use the “foundation stone” flag and would be limited to the increased decay timer and 25 foundation radius (or something like that).

On PVE - It would be the same. Set the flag, build away. No flag set, you’re limited to 25 foundation radius and build away.

Offline raid protection definitely needs to be fixed asap.

With the “flag” method, YES…Only the clan could build inside that radius. The rest of your bullets I pretty much addressed in my initial post.

As I mentioned, my preferred method is the “foundation stone.” (Which can be moved, if possible)

I don’t’ think so, as the code already exists. It just needs to be modified. The code would be in the current code for Thrall pots or feed bins. Heck, you could even use the code that would need even LESS changes…Use the code for the Bannerments. You know, the banners you can place down to allow PVP all the time on PVE?

You could modify the code to place the marker on a chosen foundaton or other point and allow building within that area. Like now it allows fighting. Probably a few days coding if you have the correct coder working on it.

So PvE players aren’t allowed to have map rooms at the Obelisks?!

This ‘idea’ is a PvP centric view that I find selfish and narrow minded. I won’t presume that I know how ‘easy’ it would be to code your idea, but your comment sounds like a white collar car enthusiast saying: “let’s just slap in a 454,” when in reality, they have no idea how difficult an engine swap is.

2 Likes

That’s why I suggested that the players be able to obtain additional flags :slight_smile:

True, it would require some small amount of upkeep, but the community might as well chip in and help out if they’re going to use public infrastructure :wink:

:rofl:

Yeah, no. Normally, I would write something more than a smiley, but I’m waaaaay over my “explain why ‘this should be easy to implement’ is naive” quota for this month.

Sometimes I wonder what makes software so special that everyone thinks they know how easy or hard it is, but then I remember that we live in an age where everyone and their dog is suddenly a freaking expert on virology and epidemiology, and I feel even worse :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Long story short: no, the code doesn’t “already exist” anymore than a Lego Millennium Falcon “already exists” in a Lego AT-AT Walker.

2 Likes

Umm, because I used to write game code. And yes, the code does already exist. It just needs to be modified. I could literally change the code from the battle standards. Extend the range and change the item from a banner to something small. What would need new coding would be limiting the number of “markers” and a few other things, but for the most part…much of the code IS indeed already there.

Huh? First, in my opinion, the maprooms are obsolete and should be removed. We have two types of mounts now. None of my players even use them anymore.

Hmm, selfish and narrow-minded? LOL. Okay. I know it’s selfish to prevent land spam. lol. Whatever dude.

LOL, Umm swapping out an engine can be done in no time. I had a new engine installed last year…it took two hours…so, bad example.

Then you know that this isn’t just about superficial similarities. It’s not “oh, there’s already an item that looks like a flag and has an area of effect, so we’ll just copy & paste some code”.

Yeah, yeah, parts of the code exist, they just have to be “modified” and “recombined”. Congratulations, you solved all software. :roll_eyes:

Let’s see:

Right, you just forgot one teeny tiny little detail: you have to completely change how the decay works and how the claim works and tie it all up with the banner. But I’m sure the effort behind that is negligible compared to adding an item with an area of effect…

1 Like

You actually proved my point. My point was that you sounded like someone commenting on something he/she has never done before. Of course taking a car to a professional mechanic, that has all the specialized equipment and performs 3-4 engine swaps per month, will make the job seem easy.

85+ percent of that code would need to be rewritten. Literally the only thing about it that is similar is the fact that it also uses a radius of effect.

This is a great example of selfish and narrow minded. We must all give up map rooms because you feel they are ‘obsolete.’

1 Like

Seriously, they’re garbage and a waste of time now that we have mounts. And BTW, IMHO means In My Humble Opinion. It doesn’t mean, I don’t like them so they should be removed. Never said it. Nowhere did I even mention map rooms. That was just out of your imagination.

I literally quoted you saying that in comment 11 of this thread, stop pretending you are dense. I voiced my reason for not liking your idea, which is because it doesn’t allow for PvE players to keep map rooms at the Obelisks:

Followed by you telling me you’re not being selfish or narrow minded:

Obviously I don’t like land claim spam. However, I do not like your idea, I feel like it will create more problems than it solves. Besides, I think Funcom has made a great effort cleaning it up so far.

Thank you for the unneeded lesson in acronyms. FYI, forcing people to do things your way without regard for others’ playstyles is precisely that, selfish. I also thought, by only considering the PvP point of view, and not seeing the ramifications your idea might have on others, you were being narrow minded, hence, selfish and narrow minded.

This post is going off track, t.b.h. I prefer reading solutions rather than player that need to defend their arguments.

The reason of this post is to find a solution against players abusing the build system in PvP to “defend” their bases by a unintentional mechanic for PvP defense.

3 Likes

Lol nailed it.

3 Likes

Does not mean Funcom has to implement it into PvE mode.

Jeez, calm your tiddies.

1 Like

Well in PvE as well. If people can’t land spam you into your base and block areas of the map off…it’s a win on PvE as well.

I used to play PvE until I realized there would never be a way for me to clear out an enemy base that was built around my base overnight.
Can’t bomb or treb it. Even if I could, I wouldn’t have been able to get the mats to build them since I was blocked in. To me, PVE is useless (notice is said “to me” not to everyone for those who don’t understand IMHO) because I could play the same game in solo mode or co-op.

Exactly AND I mentioned that it was my OPINION not something that I think needs to be implemented. Even that though was only after someone accused me of saying they couldn’t have a maproom. Lol.

Usually, I find that people that get so defense on ideas like these is because they are the type of people that are part of the problem and don’t want things fixed or they’re just one dimensional players that can’t make adjustments. People complaining about maprooms are probably still running around the map rather than using mounts.

This is bannable, so report them via Zendesk
It happened to me too, when Zendesk wasn’t around so I bite the bullet that time :confused:

2 Likes