Suggestion: Connect all servers.

[Baps 5]

Hear me out. I think it would be cool and might help keep players around if they connect both PvE and PvP servers together. So instead of 4 15x15 grids. It is one 30x30 Grid

Of course there would need to be some changes to the way PvE works in order to incorporate this. So half the server would be PvP half would be PvE. PvP rules will remain the exact same. On the PvE side bases would be immune to damage with the exception to certain circumstances. There is a couple of ways this can work for the PvE side that would mitigate any abuse when transferring from PvE to PvP.

Option A: Ship PvP is always on in the PvE area, while bases and anchored ships are Immune. However, if a ship from your company enters into the PvP side of the server, your base in the PvE areas enters a state of War for 24-72 hours(whichever works best for balance to avoid hit and run abuse). Meaning it can be attacked by anyone during that period, anchored ships also lose their protection.

Option B: Ship PvP isn’t always on. PvE rules essentially remain the same, except force perhaps force (or not) ship PvP in lawless zones. And add a passive on/off ability. In passive mode, you can’t be attacked. Out of it you can. If you leave passive mode you cannot re enter it for 1 hour. While out of passive mode, anchored ship is vulnerable but not the base. However, same rules apply as Option A when entering PvP side of the server.

Side note: if a ship enters from PvP area enters PvE, passive mode is forced off for X amount of time.

Controlling and island on the PvP side and PvE side at the same time: Simple solution. Both islands are in a constant state of war until one is given up. If someone on PvE sails a fleet into PvP and takes over an island. The island isn’t under raid protection for at least 72 hours after abandoning the PvE island. Under both options if you don’t own an island your ship is vulnerable unanchored or anchored if you enter a PvP area.

There is a few reason I think this would work and keep players around. Under the rule set it would be difficult to abuse since entering PvP will make expose you to attack from both player bases, but it still gives people the option of switching.

PvE players will still get ship v ship battles.

If a company gets wiped out in PvP, they can travel to PvE and build without being forced off to make a new character.

Both play styles have pros and cons. PvP pro is you can only be raided in your 9hour window but no more than that 9 hours. However, you are never truly safe unless you make full move to PvE. 

PvE players are nearly completely safe unless they want to get their hands dirty, which would subject them to a much longer raid window. High risk, high reward.

This system prevents PvE players from being able hop in PvP and destroy folks while he completely safe. This system would let players be much more flexible. It would also open up more islands for people to make home. Oh and side note: all end game content would be in both PvP and PvE along with discovery points. The system would never force someone to enter one system or another.

So thoughts or suggestions on improving this system?

Edited September 30, 2019 by Baps

[CoopedUp 52]

What is it about PvPer's always wanting to pick on PvEer's?  You are ALL like why can't we add a safe zone that isn't really safe to try and trick PvE players to come play with us, because they don't ever put up defenses and it'll be easy for me to troll them?

Here is a thought ... reverse your entire fucking mindset.  One map, no zones what so ever.  Everyone is PvE ... meaning all bases, ships, tames, people ... EVERYTHING is PvE and un-touchable.  You want to PvP?  Fine, you can toggle an option ... after a 24 hour delay your entire tribe goes active as PvP with everything being vulnerable for one week.  The only people you can touch is other people that have flagged PvP, but ALL PvE people can interact with all your crafting stations, chests, boxes, and anything else without repercussions or being flagged themselves for that entire week.

Doesn't that sound like more fun?  I can stay PvE flagged and raid every PvP base I want without having to worry about your cannons, tribe-mates, or tames ....

[Baps 5]

4 minutes ago, CoopedUp said:

What is it about PvPer's always wanting to pick on PvEer's?  You are ALL like why can't we add a safe zone that isn't really safe to try and trick PvE players to come play with us, because they don't ever put up defenses and it'll be easy for me to troll them?

Here is a thought ... reverse your entire fucking mindset.  One map, no zones what so ever.  Everyone is PvE ... meaning all bases, ships, tames, people ... EVERYTHING is PvE and un-touchable.  You want to PvP?  Fine, you can toggle an option ... after a 24 hour delay your entire tribe goes active as PvP with everything being vulnerable for one week.  The only people you can touch is other people that have flagged PvP, but ALL PvE people can interact with all your crafting stations, chests, boxes, and anything else without repercussions or being flagged themselves for that entire week.

Doesn't that sound like more fun?  I can stay PvE flagged and raid every PvP base I want without having to worry about your cannons, tribe-mates, or tames ....

Who pissed in your Cheerios. In my opinion, your idea isn’t good because it caters to one groups. More people want PvP than not but they want it when everyone is on an even field. Hence the PvP server. Maybe you didn’t read the suggestion clearly but what I have described caters to both groups. Not just one. The system I have suggestion does not let PvP players pick on PvE players. It gives players the option to choose based on if they are in PvE or PvP. It is opt in opt out. Don’t want to PvP? Don’t go to the PvP servers. However, at the suggeSted system allows players to retain ships, takes, and character progress while effectively switching game modes.The options are to prevent grief and troll abuse. So please “rethink your fucking mindset”

[UnknownSystemError 111]

Think of your idea like this. As a PVE player you go to a restaurant and buy a PVE pizza. After you have ordered and they have cooked it, they bring it to the table. Then the waiter jumps up onto the table, drops his pants and takes a PVP dump on half your pizza. You naturally complain that you didn't pay for a half a pizza covered in shit. The waiter tells you "Don't like eating shit, just eat the half that isn't covered." Bet your restaurant closes down fairly soon.

Edited September 30, 2019 by UnknownSystemError

[Winter Thorne 696]

18 minutes ago, Baps said:

 More people want PvP than not 

No they don't.

19 minutes ago, Baps said:

 Maybe you didn’t read the suggestion clearly but what I have described caters to both groups. 

No it doesn't.

19 minutes ago, Baps said:

It gives players the option to choose based on if they are in PvE or PvP. It is opt in opt out. Don’t want to PvP? Don’t go to the PvP servers. 

It gives pvp players the new option to go to the pve servers, along with lots of new options for where, when and how, they want to pvp.

There are no new options for pve players, except forcing them to have pvp happening on the pve servers, along with the inane toxic environment that brings with it, which is not exactly something all the pve players are crying out for.

 

Here's a suggestion -  if pvp players want pve areas on their servers, let them start bugging grapeshot for that flavor of pvp.  Quit trying to pull unwilling pve players into the scheme.  We're fairly free of grief and troll abuse now as it is.  We don't want yours, and we don't want to be your fodder either.  Leave us out of it.

[zottel 297]

They are already thinking about a PVEVP Server. While i would really enjoy some ship vs. Ship Battles for PVE  i Dont Want my base beein able to be Attacked as i Prefer to Build something Nice And also love Economy too much to Risk a base because i Want some ship Battles. What would be awesome is a Kind of Duell another player Needs to accept. Wether its ship Battles or a good old fist fight in a Pub. Actually while writing this,why Not Give us a premade. Pub Which Island ownership can Place And you can go in And have fist Fights,or the Barkeeper tells you "secrets" about the Island owners,which is just a request thing which stuff someone is looking for 

[Baps 5]

6 minutes ago, UnknownSystemError said:

Think of your idea like this. As a PVE player you go to a restaurant and buy a PVE pizza. After you have ordered and they have cooked it, they bring it to the table. Then the waiter jumps up onto the table, drops his pants and take a PVP dump on half your pizza. You naturally complain that you didn't pay for a half a pizza covered in shit. The waiter tells you "Don't like eating shit, just eat the half that isn't covered." Bet your restaurant closes down fairly soon.

Your metaphor doesn’t really apply to the “Option B” which is the opt in passive mode system. So let me try to clarify for you. The servers can all remain separate the way they are with no ability to which between worlds. Or, as I suggested, connect the worlds and allow players to switch. Now if they did this the current rule set wouldn’t exactly work. It needs a checks and balances system. A PvP player shouldn’t be able  to go to a PvE server and wreck havoc. After all it is PvE. However, a PvE player can go to the PvP and raid, kill takes, ships, etc.So there has to be a system to keep that from turning into griefing with no repercussion. Otherwise, players will leave the PvE area and loot and pillage the PvP area and return safely to their home with no worries. It would turn into per trolling and griefing very quickly. So the point of a PvE base turning into a state of war for X amount of time once they enter a PvP area is consequence. It is checks and balances. If someone leaves PvE to raid in PvP it opens their base and ships up to attack by anyone who flags PvP. That is the risk of changing servers. Don’t want that to happen? Don’t go to PvP. Or in other words don’t order the PvP. Just stick to your PvE pizza and it is business as usual. 

The point of connecting the servers at all and implementing this system is so players can choose at any point what they want their play style to be. Got wiped but managed to savage a ship, some tames, and want to keep your discoveries? Sail on over to PVE to rebuild. Getting bored of PvE, have a fleet of ships but nothing to use them on. Sail over and switch to PvP. See? It caters to both types of pizza lovers and you only get what you asked for.

[Winter Thorne 696]

9 minutes ago, zottel said:

They are already thinking about a PVEVP Server. 

A pvevp server is a type of pvp server.  If it all stays over in pvp land nobody cares.

If you put pvp on a server it's no longer a pve server.  If they take away the pve servers, the pve people will quit and no pve players will buy the game.

[Baps 5]

20 minutes ago, Winter Thorne said:

No they don't.

No it doesn't.

It gives pvp players the new option to go to the pve servers, along with lots of new options for where, when and how, they want to pvp.

There are no new options for pve players, except forcing them to have pvp happening on the pve servers, along with the inane toxic environment that brings with it, which is not exactly something all the pve players are crying out for.

 

Here's a suggestion -  if pvp players want pve areas on their servers, let them start bugging grapeshot for that flavor of pvp.  Quit trying to pull unwilling pve players into the scheme.  We're fairly free of grief and troll abuse now as it is.  We don't want yours, and we don't want to be your fodder either.  Leave us out of it.

Perhaps you didn’t read Option B. It is an opt in opt out passive mode. So pure PvE players are completely unaffected by it. However the forced flagged PvP in a PvE area is to keep trolls from living in PvE and sailing over to PvP and raid and then returning home with no consequence. To connect the servers there has to be checks and balances to prevent abuse. Hence why also a PvP player that sails in PvE can not immediately turn on passive mode. It prevents hit and runs.

1 minute ago, Baps said:

If a PvE player doesn’t want any PvP, don’t sail to the PvP area. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by Baps

[Winter Thorne 696]

14 minutes ago, Baps said:

Perhaps you didn’t read Option B. It is an opt in opt out passive mode. So pure PvE players are completely unaffected by it. However the forced flagged PvP in a PvE area is to keep trolls from living in PvE and sailing over to PvP and raid and then returning home with no consequence. To connect the servers there has to be checks and balances to prevent abuse. Hence why also a PvP player that sails in PvE can not immediately turn on passive mode. It prevents hit and runs.

If a PvE player doesn’t want any PvP, don’t sail to the PvP area. 

It's a ridiculous idea, and it's clear that you've approached this with a pvp mindset lacking the ability to put yourself in anyone else's shoes.

As pve players, we have a whole server for claims, exploring, and adventuring.  You think it's a good idea that we share that server with all the pvp players so they can all rush over there, grab claims, and hold pissing contests about who ran away from whom in general chat.  And you know they'll all want a pve claim.  They get the whole world and the choice of pvp or pve.

Pve players are not as a group eagerly wanting a choice to pvp.  So from our perspective, we don't get to share the whole server without giving up being a pve player.  We dont' want claims on the other side.  So they get both worlds and we get half.  UnknownSystemError was spot on with his analogy.

If you are really trying to sell this idea as "a player gets tired of either pvp or pve and wants to go play the other mode", then what you need to be asking for is character transfers, which are already coded into the game.    There's no reason to force pve players to put up with having all the pvp players use their server as well as their own, if that's the point of your long, complicated, strange idea with more rules than Calvinball.

 

In the interests of making it crystal clear - The main benefit of playing on a pve server is that there are no pvp players and no pvp happening.  Your idea doesn't even recognize that.  You should consider that in future suggestions for improving pvp.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Winter Thorne
clarity

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

3 hours ago, Baps said:

Hear me out. 

Heard you out.

Pass.

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

8 minutes ago, Winter Thorne said:

 ...with more rules than Calvinball.

PM me to discuss why Calvinball would be the greatest VR game EVAR, and how we can get in on it. I promise it’s much more than me having the idea and you doing all the work.

I would of course write all of the marketing copy.

Edited September 30, 2019 by boomervoncannon

[CoopedUp 52]

29 minutes ago, Baps said:

It would turn into per trolling and griefing very quickly. So the point of a PvE base turning into a state of war for X amount of time once they enter a PvP area is consequence. It is checks and balances. If someone leaves PvE to raid in PvP it opens their base and ships up to attack by anyone who flags PvP. That is the risk of changing servers.

Notice that your consequences only go one way ... PvE player travels into PvP land he gets fucked, PvP player travels into PvE land it's business as usual.  So you are punishing PvE players for the PvP players enjoyment.

Want to make it even?  PvP player sails into PvE land then all his cannons/tames/and abilities become unusable against other players and all his door locks are removed for the exact same time as a PvE players base would be become vulnerable if they were to traverse the other way.  There a consequence for sailing where you aren't wanted...

[Sturmberg World Bank 48]

Yeah we discussed this a lot and it ended always with: its better to separate pvp and pve!

[Whitehawk 382]

The only way one whole world could work would be an opt in or out of pvp mode like some games have friendly fire on or off. The problem is that pve players don't want to pvp and you can bet that there would be certain rewards you can only gain through pvp, which means that the pve player is gonna have to venture into hostile territory to get the reward. Some people may think that's fair but a lotta people won't. Also the game started with seperate worlds for pve and pvp so to force them together now after you bought the game just for the pve would be unfair. A merge would be the pve players loss no one elses.

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

Also BAPS, we promise, you're the very first person to propose merging pvp and pve.

Honest.

It absolutely hasn't already happened several times, usually every couple months like clockwork.

All of the other proposals that weren't made didn't also suffer from having no real benefit to pve players, just a way for pvpers to invade pve.

This is the first time.

As far as you know.

 

[Whitehawk 382]

Mind you it's good to keep reminding the devs of our views on this issue, cos it is something they are thinking of doing.

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

4 minutes ago, Whitehawk said:

Mind you it's good to keep reminding the devs of our views on this issue, cos it is something they are thinking of doing.

*blinks* it is? According to whom/what?

[Whitehawk 382]

well they mentioned it on the live oops sorry nonlive stream, but there was an article on steam about the new road map and it was in there.

[boomervoncannon 1,541]

1 minute ago, Whitehawk said:

well they mentioned it on the live oops sorry nonlive stream, but there was an article on steam about the new road map and it was in there.

*mutters under his breathe about people getting up to tomfoolerly when he's not paying attention.*

I suppose if they're desperate to cut costs, it might be something they're looking at.

[Whitehawk 382]

Its under phase 4 along with factions

 

[krazmuze 120]

PVE players often want nothing to do with PVP players.   They see it as a toxic, immature hateful environement to be in.      So you say OK just stay on your side of the map.   Then the PVE players says OK only if it exactly as your side of the map.  Then the PVP players no that is not acceptable higher risk higher reward - so we want better mats on our side.   That means the PVE player now has to deal with PVP by either sneaking into PVP to get the better mats, or paying PVP to get the better mats, or staying on his side with inferior mats.   So now you are back to PVE player wanted nothing to do with PVP, but to make a hybrid server work, PVE has to have something to do with PVP.  So now it appeals to the few PVE players that want the option to get into a scrap, but they are otherwise safe.  Then you have PVP players complaining about others hiding out in the PVE zone (exactly like they complain about freeports now) and they leave for a free for all game

And that is where you realize you need the PVE server, then PVP server and the PVPVE server.

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by krazmuze

[Sovereign Snow 141]

This is how I see it. PvP players have an entirely different mindset and play-style from PvE players. You could almost say they're psychologically completely different types of human beings. and I 100% agree with @UnknownSystemError when the PvP player says, "Don't like eating shit, just eat the half that isn't covered." Because that statement, in other words, has been said to me by many PvP players, especially recently, since the PvP server is the only one open.

PvE player: "Bro, could you not? I'm obviously not fighting back. Just trying to have a good time."
PvP player: "bRo, cOUld YoU nOT? Don't like it? Get off the server."

You cannot mix the two. It does not, and will not ever work. If it's attempted, players left and right will be breaking verbal abuse rules and reporting other players and nothing will ever get done because you cannot change the internet. Most PvE players are friendly, sharing and helpful. Most PvP players have their guard up 95% of the time because they don't know who is friend or who is foe. On another note, I have played 10+ rented ark servers and 5 or more rented Atlas servers... the PvP is always the same. Trash talk and completely wiping the other tribe/company until they stop trying and stop playing, thus ruining the game for the other side and the community loses yet another player, or more.

PvP players have their side of the bed, and PvE players have their side. Leave it alone.

[The D Legacy 191]

11 hours ago, Baps said:

Hear me out. I think it would be cool and might help keep players around if they connect both PvE and PvP servers together. So instead of 4 15x15 grids. It is one 30x30 Grid

Of course there would need to be some changes to the way PvE works in order to incorporate this. So half the server would be PvP half would be PvE. PvP rules will remain the exact same. On the PvE side bases would be immune to damage with the exception to certain circumstances. There is a couple of ways this can work for the PvE side that would mitigate any abuse when transferring from PvE to PvP.

Option A: Ship PvP is always on in the PvE area, while bases and anchored ships are Immune. However, if a ship from your company enters into the PvP side of the server, your base in the PvE areas enters a state of War for 24-72 hours(whichever works best for balance to avoid hit and run abuse). Meaning it can be attacked by anyone during that period, anchored ships also lose their protection.

Option B: Ship PvP isn’t always on. PvE rules essentially remain the same, except force perhaps force (or not) ship PvP in lawless zones. And add a passive on/off ability. In passive mode, you can’t be attacked. Out of it you can. If you leave passive mode you cannot re enter it for 1 hour. While out of passive mode, anchored ship is vulnerable but not the base. However, same rules apply as Option A when entering PvP side of the server.

Side note: if a ship enters from PvP area enters PvE, passive mode is forced off for X amount of time.

Controlling and island on the PvP side and PvE side at the same time: Simple solution. Both islands are in a constant state of war until one is given up. If someone on PvE sails a fleet into PvP and takes over an island. The island isn’t under raid protection for at least 72 hours after abandoning the PvE island. Under both options if you don’t own an island your ship is vulnerable unanchored or anchored if you enter a PvP area.

There is a few reason I think this would work and keep players around. Under the rule set it would be difficult to abuse since entering PvP will make expose you to attack from both player bases, but it still gives people the option of switching.

PvE players will still get ship v ship battles.

If a company gets wiped out in PvP, they can travel to PvE and build without being forced off to make a new character.

Both play styles have pros and cons. PvP pro is you can only be raided in your 9hour window but no more than that 9 hours. However, you are never truly safe unless you make full move to PvE. 

PvE players are nearly completely safe unless they want to get their hands dirty, which would subject them to a much longer raid window. High risk, high reward.

This system prevents PvE players from being able hop in PvP and destroy folks while he completely safe. This system would let players be much more flexible. It would also open up more islands for people to make home. Oh and side note: all end game content would be in both PvP and PvE along with discovery points. The system would never force someone to enter one system or another.

So thoughts or suggestions on improving this system?

so you think a game with 225 grids and a average player count of less than 5 players per grid to go 900 grids and that would magically make the game fun? that goes without even mentioning the pve only people would never play such a game, you want to pvp go pvp servers is that fucking simple, stop trying to drag pve people into the pile of shit pvp is.

[Realist 504]

13 hours ago, Baps said:

Hear me out. I think it would be cool and might help keep players around if they connect both PvE and PvP servers together. So instead of 4 15x15 grids. It is one 30x30 Grid

Of course there would need to be some changes to the way PvE works in order to incorporate this. So half the server would be PvP half would be PvE. PvP rules will remain the exact same. On the PvE side bases would be immune to damage with the exception to certain circumstances. There is a couple of ways this can work for the PvE side that would mitigate any abuse when transferring from PvE to PvP.

Option A: Ship PvP is always on in the PvE area, while bases and anchored ships are Immune. However, if a ship from your company enters into the PvP side of the server, your base in the PvE areas enters a state of War for 24-72 hours(whichever works best for balance to avoid hit and run abuse). Meaning it can be attacked by anyone during that period, anchored ships also lose their protection.

Option B: Ship PvP isn’t always on. PvE rules essentially remain the same, except force perhaps force (or not) ship PvP in lawless zones. And add a passive on/off ability. In passive mode, you can’t be attacked. Out of it you can. If you leave passive mode you cannot re enter it for 1 hour. While out of passive mode, anchored ship is vulnerable but not the base. However, same rules apply as Option A when entering PvP side of the server.

Side note: if a ship enters from PvP area enters PvE, passive mode is forced off for X amount of time.

Controlling and island on the PvP side and PvE side at the same time: Simple solution. Both islands are in a constant state of war until one is given up. If someone on PvE sails a fleet into PvP and takes over an island. The island isn’t under raid protection for at least 72 hours after abandoning the PvE island. Under both options if you don’t own an island your ship is vulnerable unanchored or anchored if you enter a PvP area.

There is a few reason I think this would work and keep players around. Under the rule set it would be difficult to abuse since entering PvP will make expose you to attack from both player bases, but it still gives people the option of switching.

PvE players will still get ship v ship battles.

If a company gets wiped out in PvP, they can travel to PvE and build without being forced off to make a new character.

Both play styles have pros and cons. PvP pro is you can only be raided in your 9hour window but no more than that 9 hours. However, you are never truly safe unless you make full move to PvE. 

PvE players are nearly completely safe unless they want to get their hands dirty, which would subject them to a much longer raid window. High risk, high reward.

This system prevents PvE players from being able hop in PvP and destroy folks while he completely safe. This system would let players be much more flexible. It would also open up more islands for people to make home. Oh and side note: all end game content would be in both PvP and PvE along with discovery points. The system would never force someone to enter one system or another.

So thoughts or suggestions on improving this system?

Nope. That simple