Unknown build limit?

The attitude of “winning” is probably the biggest factor in the culture of selfish behavior seen on official servers.

Because offline raiding is a thing the only “safe” way to be aggressive is to try to completely disarm your opponent or better yet drive them off the server so they will not retaliate (while you aren’t online). The only defense against such blitzkrieg strategies is to have an “unraidable” (or as close as you can) base to discourage assault or maintain maximum server uptime through numbers.

Sadly, it’s the unpredictability of others that feeds this cycle. You could raid someone and only take their oil, a “friendly” raid if you will. Only to have them fully offline wipe you in return. Thusly officials fall victim to all or nothing strategies in both offense and defense.

Private servers have rules that ensure that people PVP reasonably, they work to combat the unpredictability of people by making rules and banning those who don’t adhere to those rules.

Funcom seems to be taking this approach to the official servers. Winning at all costs is not the way anymore, you will eventually get banned. I say this as a toxic official PvPer who has participated in that very culture. IDK what it means for the future of official PVP, the culture adapted in response to poorly implemented systems in some cases. However, that does not mean that the many problems created by our adaptation weren’t real and significantly damaging to the CE experience.


Sure, for you and me its extreme. But, a big clan that wants to do that, can if they want. And they likely would win due to attrition. Would it last forever? Who knows, and frankly doesnt matter.

Point is, they can build like that for reasons they want to. Just because you or I disagree with it, doesnt make it wrong. We just dont like it and dont do it.

Please explain why you are on a PVP server, if not to win. Having fun? Sure, is losing and getting put in the stone age every day fun? I personally went through this for weeks on end fighting the exploiting country that cant be named in EA, when they could walk through your doors and walls. Imagine waking up every single day with nothing. Every. Single. Day. Most people quit when that happens. Some dont. Are you there just to fight and not raid? Then why does it matter what people build if you are solely there to fight?

Well, if you choose to attack someone and only take their oil, thats on you. You attack me, Im going to attack back. And Im going to try and send the message that you dont want to attack me again down the road. If that means wiping your entire base, I would. Just because you want to steal oil doesnt mean I have to be just as nice.

Remember when raiding was 24 hours a day? Plenty of offline raiding back then too. Then Funcom changed it to a six hour window. Still hate offline raiding? Private servers with raid protection is more likely your cup of tea.

It’s not about you or me but about the fun of all. That big clan isn’t taking into consideration the lag others are feeling and therefore funcom has to come in and regulate the game. Freedom comes with responsibility. If you aren’t taking into consideration the others, then expect to have your freedom taken away. That applies to playing games and life in general. And because the regulation is out there and puts those that are more…reasonable at odds with the ToS it does show a right vs wrong aspect. Their immaturity and lack of understanding effects the rest of us that don’t abuse the system but like to dabble in what is possible. I used to reasonably fence stack but now have to redesign because clan karbage or what comic book BS name couldn’t stop themselves with doors and witchfire lighting everywhere. So yes there is a right and wrong in this because their game style affects everyone in terms of what is and isn’t allowed as Funcom tries to stop abuses in the system.

1 Like

I would hope so too. But Funcom hasn’t always acted in ways that give me confidence that’s guaranteed.

And that’s definitely a good thing that I hope they will continue to do :slight_smile:

As we’ve discussed before - my perception of official servers may be skewed by some of the let’s plays I’ve seen that ran into spammer problems. And it’s quite possible that coming from singleplayer, my perception of what is ‘too big’ may be far smaller - I’ve seen the threads about numbers of building pieces, and even though I feel I’m overbuilding, I’m barely hitting 4000 (so clearly I would be unlikely to be in danger of a ban if I did that on a server…). But I’ve definitely seen a few Funcom builds that look too big to me (some of the initial Stormglass builds I remember being huge) - which fits my point about individual perceptions coming into these things.

But you see, this is where we disagree. I don’t deny there are (plenty) of examples of people building that 4-city-block desk. But what I’m talking about is the guy who decides that means 5m is fine and still gets fired. A 5m desk in an office environment, probably too big, fine. But what about 4m or 3m?

There are many clear easy examples of unreasonable (or indeed of ‘definitely reasonable’) - but at some point there is a borderline between the two states. (As many of us have argued, a lot - said borderline cannot and should not be too clearly defined - a continuum being far more useful than an absolute line.) I’m concerned that, at present, no players (and, realistically, few if any Funcom admins) necessarily know exactly where that line is.

Whereas I’m comfortably confident that there are some (I can think of one in particular who was open from the beginning that their clan had received a ban for over-building, that they were fairly sure which base was the problem and that the clan member had been actively dismantling the base to reduce its size - they were just frustrated that their good faith (or what seemed to me to be good faith) efforts had not been enough and that they couldn’t have received a warning or clearer guidance on how much more dismantling would be required. Those are the sorts of players I’m concerned about here.)

Certainly. And that’s why it’s also important that we continue arguing through these points. Because those comments are going to come no matter what, so it’s better if the counterpoints also exist. (And let’s face it, we’ve all had plenty of experience expressing some of those counterpoints by now :wink: )

I think we could probably build another whole thread out of this one :wink: So for now I’ll just say that it certainly exists, and can seem common, but as with so many of these things it’s hard to be sure on any real numbers.

1 Like

So do you want everyone to hold hands on PVP servers?

Some people play to win. Just that, win. And they will do what it takes to win. Granted, if they are breaking the rules, thats a different argument and it should be dealt with.

This little side debate started because one person says they didnt like the idea of 100 doors on a base, they only used 5-10 because any more wouldnt be fun.

Others may not have a problem with more doors on their bases (or layers of walls/foundations). Those types of people are the ones who are willing to put in the time and effort to win. If they want to play like that, they are entitled to. If you dont want to, thats fine as well. I wont tell you how to play, and I dont expect you to do the same.

Yes, the server is shared by all 40 players that might be online. Doesnt mean every single one has to play to your liking, or mine. If you want different, private servers with more or less rules are a better fit.


It seems the point of that example eludes you.

Are you suggesting that offline raiding is good for the official PVP server experience?

1 Like

Yeah this is another place I don’t feel we’re getting the true story. I just took down a build that was a massive bridge across a ravine leading to a massive platform with triple wide stairs rising up from it in switchbacks some 8 (double height) stories to a huge 8 story pyramid with foundation and fences all around it - pillars 6 to 9 stories high every 3rd block. And after taking it down piece by piece (with only a few mistakes (deleted pieces) I ended up with less than 1,500 pieces in my inventory. Something like this for example, I guestimate to be only about 5000 to 6000 pieces… My first Conan Exiles Build - Uploaded a tease of it in progress and yet people are claiming 50,000 piece builds. I guess either myself or they can’t actually count. My base is about that size and I used only a hair over 5,000 pieces.

I didn’t think that had ever actually happened - but you say [below] that you believe it has - and you have been here a lot longer than I - so I’ll concede the point.

Yup, that’s just math… But again, let common sense reign supreme. And those without it reap the sundering doom they deserve therefor. :smiley: Too cynical? :innocent:

And in conceding the point I guess I have to wonder how often exactly, and whether or not it was just an admin having a busy or bad day - the blue moon phenomena… People are human, mistakes will happen…

Yup… especially when the false numbers come from those you would otherwise and typically trust the most - or least expect of such distortedly fabrication. Oops!


Right upfront, I’ll say that I don’t know. All I can offer you is my reasoning, but there’s nothing that Funcom actually said about that specific building technique. So if anyone is looking for some definitive verdict, feel free to skip this post.

Before we talk about ceiling stacking, let’s talk about fence foundation stacking again. If you take a look at the rules, they don’t mention fence foundation stacking at all, just like they don’t mention foundation spam. The rules are generic, not specific.

So why is fence foundation stacking, specifically, a problem? And why are people who use fence foundation stacking getting banned? To try to answer that question, we have to look at how and why people use fence foundation stacking.

This is one of these cases where a picture is worth a thousand words, so let’s take a look at one:

The picture above is from a thread that’s more than 2 years old now, and I imagine that the technique is much older than that. But it’s an excellent illustration of what people are talking about when they say “fence foundation stacking”. They’re not talking about the ability to put two fence foundations close to each other, they’re talking about a specific application of that ability.

In other words, “fence foundation stacking” is not just a building technique, it’s a specific application of that technique, used as a defensive strategy on PVP servers.

Since I don’t play on PVP servers, I can only speculate about the players’ motives for building like this, but unless I’m missing something, it should be pretty obvious: since there’s a 5-hour window each freaking day during which you can get raided, regardless of whether you’re online to defend your build or not, people who want to play on PVP servers but can’t spend 5 hours every freaking day have to come up with some way to make offline raids less effective. Building densely layered fortifications like this is one of those ways.

Naturally, everyone and their grandmother got used to building like that on PVP servers. Hell, for a while, it was even “officially okay”, if you knew where to look for a confirmation.

So why are people getting banned now? Because one of the rules prohibits building in a way that leads to “loss of performance both on client and server-side”. Look at the picture above. Now try to imagine what it’s like when the server has to send all of those building pieces to several game clients at once. “Normal” builds are not as dense as that monstrosity above, so when parts of a base come into the render distance, the server has to send less data to the client.

Anyway, why am I going on about this? Because it’s important to understand that Funcom isn’t (supposed to be) banning people merely for placing fence foundations close to each other, but rather for doing it in a way that is likely to screw up the performance.

So can you use ceiling stacking in your builds? If you want to convince yourself that you have no chance of being banned for building, then the answer is “no”. Because let’s face it: Funcom could ban you, if they wanted to, without any reason, and there’s nothing you can really do about that, so there’s no way to be invulnerable to bans, only a way to convince yourself you are. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Would I use ceiling stacking in my own builds, in a limited way, for example to “laminate” some foundations that I want to look different, or to build a shallow staircase, or something equally restrained? Yep. Can I get banned for that? No idea, I’ll let you know if I use it and get banned. :man_shrugging:

To anyone who wants assurances: sorry, “common sense” is the best I can do. :wink:


I never considered counting how many pieces I’ve used. I guess I could walk it out and do some rough math?

Oh gods, the effort.

1 Like

Anything to excess is an issue on the server function. Fence stacking in my opinion isn’t an exploit because it uses geometry and not game mechanics…HOWEVER extreme uses of it has rendered areas of the map inaccessible by horse because the game shuts down on the client end. My point about 5-10 vs 100 is extreme usage that isn’t fun I have yet to meet anyone that logs in ready to start grinding away at mats to make those 100 some odd doorways. They aren’t having fun creating it, others aren’t having fun dealing with it and the company isn’t having fun with the server issues because of it.

And once again the game is continuous and therefore there isn’t winning or loosing. Only gaining advantage or suffering setbacks. If you gain advantage by negatively affecting the game play of others, that is a problem. We aren’t talk about holding hands but we are talking about ensuring everyone is enjoying themselves while playing a game. If my build is affecting how the game functions to others, then I need to change and I will because I enjoy playing the game. I expect others to do the same. If they refuse, then Funcom gets involved and suddenly all players are affected as additional rules are established to limit the abuse.

If winning trumps fun, then stop playing. Games are about the interaction between people and enjoying the game together. If you are just focused on winning, you fail to see the fun involved…and yes there is fun in logging in the desert or getting owned due to a PvP battle or just watching what you built for months burn…why? because it’s a game. I don’t play to win, i play to enjoy and yes that also applies to PvP.

1 Like

You total usage is on the clan screen now.


I wasn’t trying. I was only trying to make a point of my own opinion. I do apologize if it came across that way.

That there are some, all be it a small portion portion of people who fit that. Yes. I clearly did. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

I do not personally dismiss everyone who claims to have been banned unfairly. I do however require a bit of evidence before I just blindly believe such claims due to the shear overwhelming volume of people who love to cry wolf on these forums. Heck remember the clam that cried over multiple threads about how they were unfairly banned only to outright admit they were building INSIDE the entrance to the Black Keep? I surely do. That is just one of dozens of examples. So yeah, people like that do tend to poison the well against the few who honestly do not know what they may have done wrong. And no, I do not think it is as low as TeleTesselantor suggested. I would not put a number on it as I could not possibly have the empirical date to posture a number.


Absolutely. And the noise to signal ratio in people coming to complain on the forums doesn’t help identify what the true proportions are, which is why your 0.5% is as good as any other number, since no number really means anything. (And, as someone has pointed out at some point, we have no way of knowing what proportion of people receiving bans (fairly or not, in their view) actually comment on it. Mistakes will indeed happen - and Funcom has acknowledged that very point (I can hunt down the link again if you really care, but essentially it was just a statement to the effect that they are human and there may be mistakes, they hope to learn and improve as they go along - which seems fair enough to me). I certainly don’t mean to suggest that my anecdotal examples prove there is some great number of people in these positions - just that I believe there is evidence there may be some. Ultimately only Funcom knows (if even they do) and they may judge that a bit of uncertainty, and a certain percentage of ‘bad bans’ (for want of a better term), is the best way to go ahead. I’m mostly concerned with trying to avoid things getting to a point where a ‘bad’ solution gets added in an attempt to reduce complaints (and would probably be unsuccessful anyway…), so trying to find possible better solutions. But as Ulyssi (and you, and I, and CodeMage and etc etc) pointed out, my best solution is unlikely to solve anything anyway - in the words of the internet ‘haters gonna hate’…

1 Like

I remember one raid my clan got …everything was taken from the benches and then placed back in. The clan mates where trying to figure it all out and I’m just laughing…the warning was taken and we shored up the glaring gap in the defenses of the tree house. Made good friends during those times.


PVP community CAN exist on official servers. The reason to play online is the interaction with others, not to use them to feel powerful. I for one have meet some dope people in my time fighting, raiding and building on these servers.

I think you have the right of it, excess is the problem. When “winning” becomes more important than the health of the servers, fellow player’s experience and the game itself we all lose. I suspect this is why FC has stepped up in moderation recently. This attitude was becoming synonymous with official PvP servers.


Awesome! Thanks for that! I’m such a n00b! :pensive:

So next time I am supposed to consider someone’s base as being 50k I’ll ask for a screenshot. LOL

Honestly, 10 times bigger than my current spalling high-rise… Not possible! Says me… :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

1 Like

on EL you don’t need any doors. Just Bearers/Caravan Rhinos/or Elephants a map room and you can use the return home function. Keeps the raiders guessing where the nucleus really is on the base.

That’s another one of those really good examples where questions remain - is it emergent gameplay? Or is it an exploit? On one level it’s a clever way players have come up with to use the existing systems to create a more protected base - a clear example of emergent gameplay. On the other hand, the ‘return home’ functions are clearly meant to represent the follower walking back to the base, not teleporting (as they actually do), so could be argued as some form of exploit. As with fence foundation stacking, many people obviously use it as it is a sound tactic, but risk falling foul of it later being declared an exploit. I don’t envy you PVP guys some of the fine lines you have to walk.

1 Like

That’s total for the whole clan, right?

1 Like