Unknown build limit?

Or as I keep pointing out…build and play smarter. Look PVP is primarily a combat game and each person defines that differently. Yes if you put your base in the middle of the open grassy fields next to New Asgard, you are literally asking to be raided. You will need to defend every day. If you put your base in the Crevice, you will need to defend every day. These are not because raiding is too easy or such nonsense, this is just really dumb base establishments. the people that clan up in higher numbers and have more time on their hands to play this game literally earn these locations because of dedication…there has to be some reward to constant playing and prime base locations that everyone can see and knows about is that reward.

I do believe raiding needs to be tackled because the defenses people are usinng are just over the top junk that is just grinding out basics (doors are good, 100 doors are better…anticlimb is good, 100 anticlimb is better) over and over to develop a way to fight against folks that are on 18 hours a day…sorry but no…you can’t stop people from playing the game a lot and they will dominate…if you don’t like that play a different version because PVP isn’t for you.

However the only reason I can speak this is because there are those players that do layers and bricks of bases that draw out attackers and therefore my stuff remains intact because of it. I can log off with relative assurance that I will have a base tomorrow because they will attack eachother and not even notice me because they are all scouting for bricks and layers…this has dragged down PVP to this monotony of play as people have forgotten how to use their brains and just does what youtube tells them to.

What I fear is that mechanics will not fix this…this is just the rise of laziness in thought…where someone thinks that 100 layers of doors is a great mental achievement for base defense. Getting rid of fence layering isn’t getting rid of the mentality that designed that as the means to the end…we will just get more layers of other things up to the ToS levels (which could be why so many want to know the metric so that can get as close to that limit with their layering). It’s not Funcom that is at issue here…it’s the state of play. R1 spamming (left click for you PC folks) is the same as fence layering is the same as foundation spamming…mindless “winning” that we can put on youtube and feel proud…sorry I guess i’m just in a downward spiral today as far as my views on humanity.

4 Likes

I don’t dispute that. What I’m disputing is what “dominate” means and what the consequences are of different meanings of that word.

Right now, from what I can see on the forums, defeating someone on a PVP server means wiping them off the map. If you choose not to do that, good for you, points for being a nice guy or whatever, but the ability is there and people keep using it.

What are the consequences of that? You’ve described them yourself, along with many others, so I’m not gonna repeat it, as long as we all understand that those are the consequences of the current game design.

Yep, this is precisely why I don’t play on PVP servers. I wouldn’t mind some conflict, but the all-or-nothing conflict is not my jam. And that’s fine, we all have fun in different ways. The only reason I get involved in these discussions is because game design choices have consequences, and those consequences lead to other game design choices, and at some point it all spills over and eventually ruins the fun that I have on PVE(-C) servers.

So when I say that Funcom would have to rethink the fundamental aspects of the so-called “raiding” mechanics if they really want it to be about raiding, it’s not because I want to change the game so I can also go play on a PVP server. It’s because “raiding” is not about raiding, and that problem cascades into a series of other problems until it culminates in something that affects PVE, at which point a lot of us on PVE(-C) servers get upset because this shіt keeps happening and there’s no light at the end of the tunnel.

The state of play is a direct product of the game design. The only way to change the state of play without changing the game design is through some kind of human moderation. I trust you’ve seen what happens when Funcom tries that.

4 Likes

yep…hence the downward spiral. You can’t regulate towards good behavior.

and i get it…you are going to get more folks in pve-c that just are just refugees to the PVP and their mentality hasn’t adapted yet (maybe not ever).

And I actually think they understand raiding vs wiping but so many people put all of their eggs in one basket that the two equate. If you only have one base, the raid is the wipe. Most people only have one base they fortify to obnoxious levels.

2 Likes

Have you ever thought about finding a neutral server where top players are invited? It would be such an asset to have “Exemplar” bases on display for all to see. There would be no ambiguity about how big is too big, about which tactic is meta.

The thing is…I’m a teacher at heart. If I can give some insight or methodology that makes people better players, I am happiest. So the diversity of skill levels are something I like. However because it’s open to everyone…I get down sometimes because I just get tired of the junk. I’ll snap out of it, it’s just takes time and usually a movement of inspiration…I am just finishing a large base on one server and getting the itch to make another hidden (but not treehouse) so I’m scouting different areas. It’s going to hit here soon so I’ll snap out of it.

Yep. I think it might be time for me to take another break from Conan Exiles. I’ve had to deal with PVP-rejects harassing PVE-C servers before, and it’s never been pleasant. I’m too old for the toxic testosterone BS they bring.

EDIT: Thankfully, I’m on PC, where they can at least get banned. They’re wreaking havoc on Xbox already, without any meaningful consequences.

1 Like

I saw another post about this a few days ago. I assumed family share was off on consoles and not just PC. I guess not.

1 Like

Offline Raiding and Building Limits are mutually exclusive. You simply cannot have a building limit and expect people to have to defend their holdings with passive defenses. It doesn’t work.

Right now all of the raiding mechanics (jars, trebs, thralls*) work in an online raiding setup.

So there is two things that need to happen to make this work. Enable the offline protection. And then open raid times to 24/7. What this does is you are PVPing and defending when you login. You get to decide when you want to play and when you wish to raid/be raided. But you don’t get to abuse the system and only login when there’s no raid time.

This fixes every issue brought up in this thread. And this is the ONLY way to fix this problem. Anything else either breaks some other aspect of the game or is a fantasy.

Literally two server settings. No dev time. A simple text file edit. That is what everyone should be focused on.

1 Like

100% agree but queue the litany of reasons why it’s a terrible idea. The only one I have any sympathy for is that this makes it nearly impossible for small clans/solos to punch upwards.

2 Likes

I still stand that Offline Protection is just something between PVE-C and PVP. For those that want to fight only on their terms…yea that’s worse than just having set times. Yes hours and hours of time and energy can go up in a cloud of brimstone and fire…that’s sort of the point of it all and the reason why PVP is energizing. The real question is do you walk away cursing the game or do you walk away with something learned for next base? For someone that was raided way too much in the beginning…I learned so much with each raid. How did they get in? What made them pick me over anyone else? What could have been designed differently? Is this the right location?

Thank you, I’ve been saying this for literally years. Offline raid protection is the fix. Oh and 24/7 PvP would also work, and would be my preferred method. It would make all the 100 layer strategies not efficient any more. Nothing would work, so people would have to abandon defending their loot via building as a metric for winning, and play aggressively instead.

1 Like

Another point in favour of 24/7 raid time. It’s better for small clans and solos, not worse.

4 Likes

Because it’s harder for large clans to coordinate all being online together at the same time?

Because it removes the incentive for huge layered bases, so small clans can raid more easily. It becomes about “do I DARE attack this huge clan, they will come for me if I do.” Instead of “eh, it’d take days to raid them I may as well not even try.”

Solos can actually fight guerilla wars by waiting for windows where lone enemy clan members are isolated or the whole clan is asleep.

2 Likes

Pretty much this.

Small clans and solo players are less vulnerable than larger ones. When offline protection is on, 24/7 raiding is on. And the current build limits are in play.

A larger clan -can- have an advantage if they coordinate when they login and logoff. But getting more than half a dozen players to do that is overkill. I don’t doubt that some will do it. But they are going to fatigue themselves with that draconian level of precision.

What’s even funnier is when some deviates, logs in during an off period. And then a small group raids them. Then they’ve got to batphone everyone in. Your typical hardcore raiding guild in Everquest progression could pull that off. But no anyone else. Literally talking probably less than 1% of the playerbase here. And its not sustainable.

2 Likes

I’ve often wondered why it wasn’t that way in the first place. It seems actually stupid to force a schedule on folks with potential punishments for not adhering to it. Of course some mechanism would be needed to keep people from abusing it by logging off as soon as anyone attacks their base. And also the exploitative behavior counter that would emerge from that counter by getting some guy to casually and secretly hit their base with a pickaxe every one minute or so until the last guy in the clan they’re attacking logs off and then all of the other ten attackers converge on it for the offline kill - but really, even without those this is still more intelligent.

2 Likes

According to @Barnes this is how the original servers were configured. BUT, they didn’t have DBD at the time either. So the (incredibly oppressive in my opinion) raid schedule was probably done as a compromise of some sort to minimize the amount of offline raiding that could happen.

1 Like

Okay, now I’m somewhat confused. The way I understood Funcom’s own explanation of how DBD interacts with raid times, “raid time” is the time window when everyone is raidable regardless of whether they’re online or offline. In other words, “open raid times to 24/7” completely negates the effect of “enable the offline protection”.

Indeed, one of Funcom’s proposals for official PVP server configuration – before they shrugged and said “screw it, we’ll leave DBD off” – was to turn on DBD and only have the standard 5-hour (offline) raid window on one day a week. Or was it two? I don’t remember exactly, but the idea was that during the week you can get raided whenever you’re online (and up to 30 minutes after you log off), and then the weekend has one day to go nuts with raiding and one day to rebuild.

So did I misunderstand something? You play on private servers, @Taemien, where you can actually enable DBD. Does it work different from how Funcom described it?

1 Like

Well, I’m sure @Taemien will answer for himself but that’s not how I perceive it.

24/7 + OLP = You can attack anyone who is online - anytime they are online.

With a 30 minute cooldown would work as was originally proposed for DBD. Meaning last clan member logs off, base is still taking damage for at least 30 minutes. And eventually that clan has to log on to repair. And does become a game of cat and mouse. But that opens up more alliances as well. Plus the toxic large clan would have to be careful not to ■■■■■■■ 3 or 4 smaller clans. They could take turns hitting back whenever the Alpha logged in. Makes so much more sense this way.

2 Likes