WTF! The map is 9 days old! Closing off Map Areas

,

I hope they do something about this we bought a server to avoid this we are a big survival pvp/ pve clan this was a major problem in ark survival to people just entering the sever can’t build where they want or anywhere in sum cases I just hope that this creator dose sumthing about it before it gets to far out of hand it really ruins the game when new players have to spend hours to find a server to play on simply because someone want to claim the whole map to them selves

2 Likes

And I reported a server on ps4 5 months ago… and the massive land claim… and building blocking dungeons as well as almost every obelisk is still there… soooo… not only do they not respond to forum posts… they dont answer reports sent to them the right way…

But then again I did get a reply… they said they will look into it… there flooded with this sort of thing… then also went on to tell me they would not tell me if they actually handled the problem… but then again I already would know if they handled it cause the massive land claim blocking dungeons and obelisks would be gone… and they are not… so I can assume it has not been handled…

There are easy fixes for this abuse… I just dont understand why implementing them are a major issue… if your blocking off everything its griefing and thats that… its not pvp its basically trying to get people to quit the game… which is why I can assume alot would quit playing… they need to fix this issue… and it is an issue otherwise there wouldnt be posts about it almost constantly

2 Likes

Because they all come at significant cost, and I don’t just mean financially. The level of freedom we have to build in CE is part of what makes CE special. Any action to restrict abuse of that freedom other than paying someone to sit around and watch each individual server 24/7 is going to chip away at that freedom. In the end it may be necessary, but the costs still have to be weighed.

not really. if you only look at one problem and ignore all side effects then everything is easy

the flaw in such statements can always be seen in the fact that it makes little to no sense not to include an “easy” fix for a problem. but if it was not integrated then it was probably not “easy” after all. then it simply helps to expand your own limited horizon and realize that others also play the game, and probably not all in the same way. from then on “easy” is definitely no longer the order of the day

4 Likes

sitting quitely looking at the video as i shake my head slowly and thinking how nice that i have my own whitelisted server for trusted ppl only

see bois?..this is why one should not invest in public servers…

4 Likes

lol people will say this isnt an easy fix when it is… you cant have it both ways… so the answer becomes a very simple thing…

Either you sit here and enjoy the massive land claim and all the freedom of griefing if thats the big deal… cause if they limit the building its taking away someones freedom to grief the server…

or you fix the problem and limit the amount of building…

Its actually very very simple… the people who are saying its not right to limit the amount of freedom of building… your not trying to solve the problem… your encouraging it… besides that numerous suggestions have been given aside from limiting building and none of them have been done…

this isnt some fragile thing… its either you enjoy the griefing of massive land claim… or you want to see a solution… your either on one side or the other at this point…

my hostility comes from this game actually being good… but if they dont care about it why should anyone else… this has been an issue for years… and has gone unfixed for years… lol the game recieved its dlc… I dont know how much longer it actually has… at this point I guess it wont matter much if something as simple as this cant be fixed after years

No, it isn’t. And no amount of “lol its easy” will change it, because “lol its easy” isn’t even an argument in itself, much less a counter to the arguments other people have taken the time to point out.

Yes, we can, because the situation cannot be reduced to just two alternatives. It’s a false dichotomy.

Few people are saying that. Most people are saying that it’s a complicated problem to solve, with a several non-trivial solutions, whose costs needs to be weighed.

Have you stopped to ask yourself why?

That’s your reductionist point of view. The fact that you like it doesn’t make it true.

Your hostility is your problem, not anyone else’s on these forums. If you’re incapable of discussing things rationally despite that hostility, you won’t find a lot of traction.

I’m not very worried here on PC:

If you have data that shows that the situation is different on PS4, I would suggest looking at what makes these platforms different and coming up with suggestions to tackle that. Lack of building restrictions is implemented on both platforms, so if there’s any difference in playerbase trends, that’s not the cause.

5 Likes

Please @CodeMage your responses are usually spot on but this is a crock. It IS an easy fix and the code is already there. They just need to change the triggers.

They can do any or all of the following:

  • Allow placement of select items in land-claim areas. (This would allow players to still attack the base if needed)
  • Turn on 24/7 Raid times - This would require these spammers to stay back and protect their base and make it tougher for them to farm and keep up the spamming.
  • Turn on Offline Raid Protection - If they spam the map and try to hide from the players working to remove the land claim, this would cause their claims to decay.
  • Using the stability model that counts the number of pieces from a point of stability, they could simply alter that code (after making a new copy of course) that allows a player to designate a “foundation stone” and then allow X amount of tiles to be placed in a radius from that point.

These people saying, “We should have the freedom to build”…I agree, however, a line of foundations one layer high across multiple grid map grids is not building. That’s just being a coward and a jerk.

And yes, to my foundation stone…you COULD build more than one base though those other based would have to be smaller. Once you get past (ie 40 foundations) from the foundation stone, then it begins to count down base integrity. It doesn’t even have to prevent further building. They could make it decay faster so that they would have to do constant upkeep. There are a number of things that could be done. Saying it’s NOT simple is just BS. It is simple. They just have to decide on the method then actually do it.

Still not simple. You completely ignored CodeMages post and all the variables to consider.

Not sure what is with video games that make gamers insist that every problem is “easy” or “simple” to solve.

3 Likes

I don’t know, if that’s a crock, what do you call replying with “lol its easy” without providing anything of substance? What do you call saying that if you don’t think it’s easy, you’re encouraging the problem? :man_shrugging:

Also, I hope you’re not taking my replies to @Tantel and interpreting them as replies to you. At no point did I say that your concerns and complaints are invalid, or that they don’t have a solution or mitigations.

So, let’s set the goal posts correctly here. What exactly are you claiming has an easy fix here? Yes, I’ve read the whole post and it has several good ideas I completely agree with, but they don’t seem to support the claim you seem to be making.

If the claim is “limiting the amount of building players can do”, then it most definitely does not have an easy solution and I am prepared to debate the crap out of that :smiley:

If the claim is “there are ways to mitigate some of the overbuilding problems on PVP servers”, then hell yeah, you’re totally right.

This sounds like it wouldn’t be too costly to implement, although I can’t be sure.

This one should be easy.

I don’t know about this one. Does anyone have any idea of how well it works on private servers? Similarly, does anyone have an idea why they haven’t enabled it on officials?

They have all these mechanisms already in place, for things like follower cap and offline raid protection, but they haven’t activated any of them. I’m hesitant to call it “easy” until it’s clear why they’re not using it.

So before I get to the next item on your list, let’s take a quick look at these first three taken together. If they were easy to implement – and it’s not quite conclusive they are, but let’s assume they are for the sake of discussion – what they would do is provide good strategies for PVP servers to deal with overbuilding and foundation spam.

They most certainly wouldn’t be an “easy fix” to the overbuilding problem itself or a way to “limit building”, as @Tantel claims and you seem to believe.

Now, on to the last item:

Let me be clear here: even without having access to the source code or extensive experience with UE4, I can tell you that this is certainly not easy or simple. The vast majority of times people say “they could simply alter that code”, it’s a case of someone having no understanding of code in general, let alone the particular bit of code they’re talking about. The remaining few cases of experts giving informed opinions are quite simply outliers.

Don’t take this as a personal attack. I’m simply stating that you’re vastly underestimating the complexity of the stability propagation algorithm itself, let alone its suitability for the task of limiting the builds.

And all of that is just about the complexity of the work. We haven’t even looked at what the actual requirements are. It’s easy to say “we need to solve overbuilding”, but it’s so vague that it’s useless. The actual definition of what you want to discourage and how is something that people on these forums haven’t even tried to formulate and explore properly, despite the fact that it keeps popping up in discussions all the time.

Every idea on how to limit the building is going to have ramifications that you need to think about. There are unforeseen consequences at the moment of inception of every idea and it’s the game designer’s job to think these things through instead of just slapping the idea in front of the devs and saying “let’s get it done”.

This is exactly what I was reacting to earlier. Merely asserting that things are simple is not a conversation, it’s just competing to shout louder than the others. To echo the sentiment in your reply to me: your posts are usually better than that :wink:

I mean, you could say the same thing about anything. Want to “solve crime in the inner city”? It’s a simple two-step process: 1) decide on how to do it, and then 2) actually do it.

:man_shrugging:

1 Like

I disagree. At least until offline raid protection is turned on. This forum would melt down if they had to be on 24:7 to protect their bases

It doesn’t work on Private Servers as far as I know (buggy/not working). And it’s not on now due to exploits that they found with it (during the period they announced that it was a thing they would be turning on).

And as usual, the forums melted down because people thought that it could be abused, that offline raiding was PvP, how Funcom was short sighted (as usual, they can’t do anything right with this community), and yadyayada

2 Likes

Sure, but there’s a difference between “it’s easy” and “they should do it now”. I was commenting on the former, not the latter.

I agree that setting raid time to 24/7, on its own, would cause a forum meltdown of extraordinary proportions. I also think that even with the offline raid protection it won’t be as effective as @dniezby thinks, because it takes a couple of minutes to refresh your base. Even though the raid window extends to 30 minutes after they log out, good luck catching them.

Well, there goes the whole “it’s an easy fix” idea. I’m just hoping that we can all stay civil here and avoid blaming people who point out facts for being “part of the problem” somehow.

I remember that someone explained how it could be circumvented with two sets of accounts. I don’t remember the details, but I do remember that it was rather convincing.

Player A’s main account builds a wall around his alts base. Logs off before raid time. Uses alt to play, knowing his base, loot, etc whatever, was safe behind a wall that couldnt be damaged due to main account being logged off and raid protection enabled.

Alt account would have a make-shift shack to work from till after normal raid window, then opens the wall with main account to access his stuff after raid time.

1 Like

Am I correct in assuming that this won’t work if the raid time is 24/7?

1 Like

Oh, if its Raid time 24/7 it would, unless there is offline protection. I think thats what the issue was, was using Alt accounts to shield peoples bases.

If there was no offline protection, and 24/7 raid time, then it wouldnt work.

1 Like

Sorry, I should’ve explained which part of your reply confused me. Yes, the issue at hand is abusing offline protection. What I don’t understand in your explanation is this:

and this:

I took all those references to “raid time” and “raid window” to mean “the window of time configured in server settings during which raiding is enabled regardless of online status”, i.e. the current meaning of “raid time” on official servers.

If I misunderstood, can you please explain? If I did understand that part correctly, can you tell me if the strategy would work if the raiding is enabled 24/7 but only when people are online (and for 30 minutes after logging off)?

1 Like

wait what? Is that a pvp thing?

Yeah we got messed up.

My origional reply to you was the situation that would be exploited IF Funcom implemented the offline raid protection they talked about right after the EA launch of Siptah, while still having the normal raid times. The second player, or alt account whichever, who builds a defensive wall around another players base would not be able to take damage and therefor, the stuff on the inside couldnt be raided. That was the exploit.

If they implemented a 24/7 raid timer, then my reply to you doesnt apply. The alt accounts wall can be attacked, blown through and the “protected” base inside would be free to be attacked.

I hope I explained it better this time.

3 Likes

Crystal clear! Thanks for explaining it patiently :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Welcome to Minecra…I mean Conan Exiles.