Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Murillo

Offline protection

Recommended Posts

On 12/23/2019 at 9:16 PM, Dingiva said:

I wouldnt be fine with that. But im one of those players who adapts the situation. If i need to make friends to compete - ill do it. Im not one of those anti-social "fk that sheet, im gonna stay in my 4 man company because we r cooler than everyone else and everyone who beats us is unemployed, cheats und hacks anyways"-bobs.
But well... obviously, for you, everyone else that manages to gather more than just a few people around himself is a sociopatic wanker. Jesus christ. What if i said "you are just a sociopathic wanker who is so narcisstic that he doesnt accept other players in his base/company"? Same thing. No proof, just "mimimi qq i need a reason why you suck and im better than you mimimi qq".

Ingame, i come across so many grids, where people settle, but dont even communicate with each other. I guess in 2019, nearly 2020, people prefer to sit in their single-minded comfort zone, aight?

The one who doesnt see the fucking problem is just one person: You.
Get over it. Massive multiplayer online games arent made for small groups. They give us the possibility to play together with lots of other players. Thats what they are made for.

Even about 20 years ago, you had up to 15 teammates, in counter strike. Now, 20 years later, the idea of playing together with a large group of players, who may be friends in real life, has to be changed because of... well, because of whom? Some people who dont want to talk to others? At least, thats my experience in the game.
When someone places a bed on one of our islands, i destroy it. I even sink his ship. I dont care. He is red to me. He is a potential enemy. And wonder what: After i destroy the beds or sink them, they start to talk in the chat. Flaming, crying. What they dont realize: They could have avoided that by just a fking sentence in the chat BEFORE they place their beds. "Hi, im friendly, i just want to place a discovery bed on your island".
But obviously, thats too much for most players these days. Just afterwards, they manage to cry in the chat, flooding it with their idiotic brainstuff - THATS not too much for them, it seems. They can write 50 sentences afterwards, but arent able to write ONE fking sentence in before? Thats exactly the behavior of those small group players.
 


That wouldnt change anything. The same people that dont stand a chance with their small 5-man-group would still cry because they get outnumbered. Its always the same. In every game.

For now, like 80% of the playerbase is organized in larger companies and alliances. Obviously, its the majority of players. The whole discussion is about a change of the mechanics, because the minority isnt happy.
No Alliances? So what? That doesnt hinder me to communicate with other companies, that doesnt hinder me from not attacking specific companies. And the ship limit? If we had a 30 player limit - basically half of the players would be forced not to own a ship? Why?
Who dares to tell the vast majority of players "Nah, you cant have personal ships in your company, because litte justin doesnt want that"?

To limit the possibilities of a game, just because the absolute minority of players cant handle the system as it is - is that really what we want?

Guess what: Like 15 players that joined us later on or are allied with our company were raided by us before. We didnt force them to join, we didnt force them to ally with us. We just had nice conversations.

But i guess, most of those people who need special treatments like extra offline protection and stuff are more the "HAHAHA IM GONNA DESPAWN ALL MY STUFF HAHAHAHAHAHA!" type of players, the most idiotic type of players of course. They think that my company, our allies or personally me will be p*ssed if they do so. They just ignore the fact that we dont care. Just because we know: they just behave like that because they are p*ssed way more than we could ever be.



 

You make a lot of assumptions about me to tell me that I have an issue with the game, well I don't.  I'm offering Ideas for improvements on this hot mess of a game.  At launch 50k people played the game, 1 month later 10k players, 2 months 5k players.  Claiming that you are the majority is ignorant at best, most people moved on from the game already because they can see the limitations that it currently has.   MMO means massive multiplayer it doesn't mean groups of 100-500 playing against groups of 20 exclusively.  I would say most people in large companies are only there because they don't want to lose everything daily.  Yes I've been in large groups I've played 24 hr pvp before with I group I lead that had 120 people and we would have 30-40 people on teamspeak now discord on.  We've had days where a match mattered and we went against another group that was running 30-40 people for 16hrs non stop.

 

The game works for you, great the game doesn't work for me currently mostly my issue and yes I can join a group but I don't even play pvp currently. 

It doesn't mean that I cant offer solutions, mechanics changes, or lets have a hardcore PVP server with no protections and a PVE/PvP  king of the hill server that offers full protections in some areas  and areas with the current war timers.  ( they added war timers because the majority companied that it sucked when you logged off and 10min later someone claims your base (no pvp)  Its an early access game for a reason

Everyone has their own idea on what pvp means

For me its when I'm online fighting against other players that are currently playing.

For some its I'm online and I destroyed that company while they slept.

For some its we over came their base planning/ defenses and won.

All are valid opinions and all deserve a place in the game, but just my opinion 

 

There a good quote out there for pvp and that is, The view from the top is all Roses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6
 Advanced issues found
 
8
On 12/24/2019 at 5:19 AM, Dingiva said:

Actually, its 46 asshole asian bot friends, not 11.

Btw. the devs havent been misguided. You just need to accept that YOU are not a part of the MAJORITY of the players. Of course, you dont like to hear that. But obviously, the devs do whatever matches what the majority of players want. If they dont do what you want - you´re the minority. Deal with it. Thats the difference between you and other players: other players still play this game, they adapt the situation, and they arrange with the situation. While you sit in your chair, complain "the game isnt like i want it to be!", spam the forum and quit to play other games - where you complain as well, for sure.

Oh, so you see my point then...very few players are playing this game. The few players remaining are indeed the majority but the masses of players that have abandoned this game were at one time the majority. All of the masses that had fled the game couldn't possibly be because the game has taken a very bad game developmental direction, could it? Naw, not according to you and the few numbers of players that persist apparently just "adapt" to shitty game designs and buggy coding and except it "as is". I guess you and your ilk just like to take whatever crap the devs are poo-pooing with a smile because it is easy than speaking up.

You see, we are all the consumers, so we all get to have a voice no matter what you think. Being a consumer and hopeful fan of this title's potential, I owe it to the devs to offer encouraging advice and honest negativity, whatever will help persuade and hopefully motivate the devs to rethink certain design failures so that they can better improve and to hone this game into a lucrative gem once more.

It is my opinion, that the devs have been misled into thinking that this game is fine just the way it is but that is just not the case at all but hey if they want to listen to the few who have remained opposed to the considerable masses that have fled over the last year then that is their perspective and ATLAS will ultimately fall to the wayside in mediocrity and inexcusable game flaws and then inevitably be forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2019 at 8:42 AM, Mr. Rogers said:

Ingame, i come across so many grids, where people settle, but dont even communicate with each other. I guess in 2019, nearly 2020, people prefer to sit in their single-minded comfort zone, aight?

Ummm, this is largely due to the fact that the servers are not region restricted so you end up having a lot of neighbors that do not speak the same language. Unfortunately, in most cases, those very same players, once becoming aware of your presence generally become mindless psychos with only one thing on their mind, the eradication of you and your structures from their island. (I only play on lawless regions, so that is the only game perspective I am speaking about).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2019 at 8:42 AM, Mr. Rogers said:

What they dont realize: They could have avoided that by just a fking sentence in the chat BEFORE they place their beds. "Hi, im friendly, i just want to place a discovery bed on your island".

Wow, you have to be a very young, unworldly, and extremely naive person who lacks empathy and other essentially successful traits to pass as a human being.

Do you think that this policy will work for all occasions? Nope, it might be your preference that players announce and request access to the island you dwell on but that certainly is not my experience with all of the other psychotic island inhabitants that I have encountered. Generally, once your presence is known, you will be immediately told to get lost. I have found it much safer and more successful to hide my outposts opposed announcing where they reside. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2020 at 1:51 AM, vaylain said:

Wow, you have to be a very young, unworldly, and extremely naive person who lacks empathy and other essentially successful traits to pass as a human being.

Do you think that this policy will work for all occasions? Nope, it might be your preference that players announce and request access to the island you dwell on but that certainly is not my experience with all of the other psychotic island inhabitants that I have encountered. Generally, once your presence is known, you will be immediately told to get lost. I have found it much safer and more successful to hide my outposts opposed announcing where they reside. 

i personally only announce myself if i'm doing a map and the spot is in their base. if they tell me to fuck off i generally wipe them off the map or run their harbor into the bottom of the sea. if im putting discovery beds down, i don't ask, i just do it. if they destroy it or try to chase me off, ill come and wipe them later... some people don't know respect so you gotta teach them.. wipe them out so someone who knows respect can move in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2020 at 7:30 AM, vaylain said:

Oh, so you see my point then...very few players are playing this game. The few players remaining are indeed the majority but the masses of players that have abandoned this game were at one time the majority. All of the masses that had fled the game couldn't possibly be because the game has taken a very bad game developmental direction, could it? Naw, not according to you and the few numbers of players that persist apparently just "adapt" to shitty game designs and buggy coding and except it "as is". I guess you and your ilk just like to take whatever crap the devs are poo-pooing with a smile because it is easy than speaking up.

You see, we are all the consumers, so we all get to have a voice no matter what you think. Being a consumer and hopeful fan of this title's potential, I owe it to the devs to offer encouraging advice and honest negativity, whatever will help persuade and hopefully motivate the devs to rethink certain design failures so that they can better improve and to hone this game into a lucrative gem once more.

It is my opinion, that the devs have been misled into thinking that this game is fine just the way it is but that is just not the case at all but hey if they want to listen to the few who have remained opposed to the considerable masses that have fled over the last year then that is their perspective and ATLAS will ultimately fall to the wayside in mediocrity and inexcusable game flaws and then inevitably be forgotten.


Okay, i see. You´re assuming you´re speaking for all players that don´t play this game anymore. Seems legit.
I guess the major difference between me and you is that i accepted to play an early-access game when i bought the game, while knowing what "early access" really means. When reading all the reviews on steam, im pretty sure you´d be able to wipe out 85% of the bad reviews as "Reviewer doesn´t know what early access games are".

Of course, you have the right to criticize the game, and to make suggestions. But, and thats the problem: You think you speak for the vast majority of players. For all those who dont play anymore, because of several reasons. And you lack to understand that you´re not the chosen one in that case, since nobody is "the guy that is right".

Btw. all of my family, friends, workmates stopped to play this game, because of players like you. I speak for them. I have no proof for that, but yeah... i do speak for them. I guess you might realize how dumb that argument is, and maybe you´ll stop to pretend to know why the huge playerbase doesnt play this game currently/anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2019 at 4:16 AM, Dingiva said:

I wouldnt be fine with that. But im one of those players who adapts the situation. If i need to make friends to compete - ill do it. Im not one of those anti-social "fk that sheet, im gonna stay in my 4 man company because we r cooler than everyone else and everyone who beats us is unemployed, cheats und hacks anyways"-bobs.
But well... obviously, for you, everyone else that manages to gather more than just a few people around himself is a sociopatic wanker. Jesus christ. What if i said "you are just a sociopathic wanker who is so narcisstic that he doesnt accept other players in his base/company"? Same thing. No proof, just "mimimi qq i need a reason why you suck and im better than you mimimi qq".

The one who doesnt see the fucking problem is just one person: You.
Get over it. Massive multiplayer online games arent made for small groups. They give us the possibility to play together with lots of other players. Thats what they are made for.

Even about 20 years ago, you had up to 15 teammates, in counter strike. Now, 20 years later, the idea of playing together with a large group of players, who may be friends in real life, has to be changed because of... well, because of whom? Some people who dont want to talk to others? At least, thats my experience in the game.
When someone places a bed on one of our islands, i destroy it. I even sink his ship. I dont care. He is red to me. He is a potential enemy. And wonder what: After i destroy the beds or sink them, they start to talk in the chat. Flaming, crying. What they dont realize: They could have avoided that by just a fking sentence in the chat BEFORE they place their beds. "Hi, im friendly, i just want to place a discovery bed on your island".
But obviously, thats too much for most players these days. Just afterwards, they manage to cry in the chat, flooding it with their idiotic brainstuff - THATS not too much for them, it seems. They can write 50 sentences afterwards, but arent able to write ONE fking sentence in before? Thats exactly the behavior of those small group players.
 

Seriously?

Counter strike? Yeah, who doesn't remember all the fun we had in CS in a 5 vs 50 match.

Also, you completely ignore the complete and utter lack of counters to being large in this game.

How do you beat the ones who are being large? (Hint: There are ZERO ways to do it right now, except for being even larger)

If someone solo wrecks some of your properties, there isn't even a way to go into hiding, because the game tells you who did it.

Even if you succeed in doing damage to them, there is no way to avoid the inevitable retaliation.

So you can't even employ guerilla tactics in order to compensate being smaller in numbers, not even a little.

The whole game just blatantly favors the ones who are stronger in numbers, that is all.

And if i need a group of 50 people to even begin playing this utter piece of garbage, then i'm out.

And i'm not going to be the only one.

In fact, i fully expect the vast majority of players to turn their backs on a game that clearly doesn't want them to play.

And the total player count fucking shows it.

If there is a REWARD in something (ANY!!! reward at all), there should be a RISK associated with it.

Having 50 people in your corp clearly is an advantage in and of itself, so why the flying fuck isn't there ANY risk attached?!

This is basic game design 101.

You can have a bigger gun, which will one shot kill someone, but it will have slower reload time, to the point where your DPS is less than with the standard weapon.

You can also have a fast firing pistol, which will do less damage per shot, but will fire so fast that it has higher DPS, but it is not dealing all its damage upfront, but over a time period instead, so that the victim could regenerate some health.

None of these options would drastically change your total time to kill, because you do not get a universal advantage without any drawbacks.

What is the fucking drawback to having 50 people?

Why are you so opposed to the idea of making the game a little more fair, concentrating more on individual player skill instead of just having nothing but the raw numbers decide each and every single battle?

Then again, i should probably be thankful that this shithole of a game is binding all the fucktards who would otherwise pester other games i still care to play with their repulsive presence.

Edited by user1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, user1 said:

Seriously?

1. Counter strike? Yeah, who doesn't remember all the fun we had in CS in a 5 vs 50 match.

2. Also, you completely ignore the complete and utter lack of counters to being large in this game.

3. How do you beat the ones who are being large? (Hint: There are ZERO ways to do it right now, except for being even larger)

4. If someone solo wrecks some of your properties, there isn't even a way to go into hiding, because the game tells you who did it.

5. Even if you succeed in doing damage to them, there is no way to avoid the inevitable retaliation.

6. So you can't even employ guerilla tactics in order to compensate being smaller in numbers, not even a little.

7. The whole game just blatantly favors the ones who are stronger in numbers, that is all.

8. And if i need a group of 50 people to even begin playing this utter piece of garbage, then i'm out.

9. And i'm not going to be the only one.

10. In fact, i fully expect the vast majority of players to turn their backs on a game that clearly doesn't want them to play.

11. And the total player count fucking shows it.

12. If there is a REWARD in something (ANY!!! reward at all), there should be a RISK associated with it.

13. Having 50 people in your corp clearly is an advantage in and of itself, so why the flying fuck isn't there ANY risk attached?!

14. This is basic game design 101.

15. You can have a bigger gun, which will one shot kill someone, but it will have slower reload time, to the point where your DPS is less than with the standard weapon.

16. You can also have a fast firing pistol, which will do less damage per shot, but will fire so fast that it has higher DPS, but it is not dealing all its damage upfront, but over a time period instead, so that the victim could regenerate some health.

17. None of these options would drastically change your total time to kill, because you do not get a universal advantage without any drawbacks.

18. What is the fucking drawback to having 50 people?

19. Why are you so opposed to the idea of making the game a little more fair, concentrating more on individual player skill instead of just having nothing but the raw numbers decide each and every single battle?

20. Then again, i should probably be thankful that this shithole of a game is binding all the fucktards who would otherwise pester other games i still care to play with their repulsive presence.

Dude, stop using a new line for every single sentence. This isnt WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger.
To make it easier to respond to all that BS, i ordered it into numbers.

1.) The difference between Counterstrike and ATLAS is: In Counterstrike, the server managed the teams, so it became even numbers. In ATLAS, there isnt such an option. And because players are lazy, selfish, too dumb or whatever, they cant manage to group up. I wonder why some people can, and others stay solo/duo/trio while complaining.
2.) There is a lack of counter-measures? Doubt it. I could tell you how to fight larger companies, but well... if you cant find out by yourself, its your problem.
3.) Read 2.)
4.) There is. A very simple one. A very, very simple one. I could tell you, but well... read last part of 2.) HINT: No 2nd account needed, no erased character needed.
5.) I could ask you why you complain about another company being able to fight back after you attacked them, but I wont.
6.) You can.
7.) Oh, you want to have the same benefits without the effort to group up with other people? Do you complain at work that people who group up while working on projects finish their work faster than you, working solo?
8.) You dont, but obviously, this game isnt made for you anyways.
9.) Yeah, too many snowflakes around these days.
10.) Its hard for some people to realize that they cant expect a Porsche when buying a Volvo. Obviously, the game is made for players that can handle the circumstances. You´re not one of them, it seems. So you´d better look out for a game that fits your playstyle/skills.
11.) The total player count, counting in the reviews just shows that players bought an early access game, while expecting a bug free final release game.
12.) Risks of being a large company: Players losing interest. Players forming own groups within the company. Company becomes an interesting target for other large companies. Company gets invaded by insiders. Thats just a few. Theres more. But you didnt even try to think about it, since you only see your own point of view, not even trying to think outside the box. Thats why you wrote 2.), 3.) and 4.)
13. Read 12.), you dont need to repeat yourself.
14.) Thanks god you´re not a game designer/developer. I highly doubt that you´d be able to decide what a proper game design is.
15.) You forgot to complain that people can have more health than you, due to higher level.
16.) Read 15.)
17.) Ehm?
18.) You basically ask why people dont get punished for not playing solo/duo/trio. In a multiplayer game. Thats cute.
19.) More fair? For whom? Only for solo/duo/trio players, obviously. You ask for drawbacks and risks for players in a larger company than yours. What if the larger company has 20 players, max level 40, while you sit in your highly effective deffed base, with a group of just 4 level 120 players? Is that fair? I doubt it.
20. Typical "blabla i dont care about this game blabla thats why i waste my time here in the forums blabla".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

Dude, stop using a new line for every single sentence. This isnt WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger.

Bite me

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

1.) The difference between Counterstrike and ATLAS is: In Counterstrike, the server managed the teams, so it became even numbers. In ATLAS, there isnt such an option. And because players are lazy, selfish, too dumb or whatever, they cant manage to group up. I wonder why some people can, and others stay solo/duo/trio while complaining.
2.) There is a lack of counter-measures? Doubt it. I could tell you how to fight larger companies, but well... if you cant find out by yourself, its your problem.
3.) Read 2.)
4.) There is. A very simple one. A very, very simple one. I could tell you, but well... read last part of 2.) HINT: No 2nd account needed, no erased character needed.

So. You say there is a way, but fail to provide any evidence that this claim was true.

You are literally full of shit. I could totally prove it to you right here and now, but i can't be bothered and it should be obvious for everyone to see.

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

5.) I could ask you why you complain about another company being able to fight back after you attacked them, but I wont.

6.) You can.

Don't worry, because i actually don't complain that they are able to fight back. As long as i am in the vicinity, they obviously can, and should. But if i manage to escape without being detected, the game should probably not tell them who did it.

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

7.) Oh, you want to have the same benefits without the effort to group up with other people? Do you complain at work that people who group up while working on projects finish their work faster than you, working solo?

Right. Because fairness obviously has no place in a game. I would also complain if a sports team were allowed to have 10 times as many players on the field as their opponent.

Also, why do you insist on letting teams of 50 people compete vs soloists in the first place?

Why do you need to boost your tiny, fragile ego by partaking in an activity where the outcome is already decided from the very beginning, by you being 50 people beating up a single person?

Would you find it equally as fun if you were on the other side?

There is nothing wrong with asymmetric PvP, but you can do it correctly (as in Eve online for example) or you can do it in a profoundly stupid way, such as in Atlas.

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

8.) You dont, but obviously, this game isnt made for you anyways.
9.) Yeah, too many snowflakes around these days.

I'm far ahead of you and stopped playing this utter piece of garbage months ago.

Also, this bunch of idiots company won't ever see another cent from me.

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

10.) Its hard for some people to realize that they cant expect a Porsche when buying a Volvo. Obviously, the game is made for players that can handle the circumstances. You´re not one of them, it seems. So you´d better look out for a game that fits your playstyle/skills.

I bought a game. Admittedly a game in EA, but still. Instead i got a piece of shit.

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

11.) The total player count, counting in the reviews just shows that players bought an early access game, while expecting a bug free final release game.

Either that, or there is another reason why players are deeply unsatisfied with this game. Probably because they agree that the balance is complete bollocks.

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

18.) You basically ask why people dont get punished for not playing solo/duo/trio. In a multiplayer game. Thats cute.

You seem to be undere the woefully wrong impression that "punishment" in this regard was a bad thing. You probably assume that whoever gets "punished" in this way is meant to lose. In reality, this is not true. Being "punished" only means that you don't get a default win handed to you just because you brought 2 people more than your opponent.

Think "diminishing returns", instead of "the bigger one must die".

20 hours ago, Dingiva said:

19.) More fair? For whom? Only for solo/duo/trio players, obviously. You ask for drawbacks and risks for players in a larger company than yours. What if the larger company has 20 players, max level 40, while you sit in your highly effective deffed base, with a group of just 4 level 120 players? Is that fair? I doubt it.
20. Typical "blabla i dont care about this game blabla thats why i waste my time here in the forums blabla".

I do not ask for drawbacks for companies larger than *MINE*!

I ask for company size to not be the single most important factor in deciding the outcome of any conflict.

I ask for diminishing returns, which is a concept that is completely absent from this game.

The way things are right now, it is only "more fair", to use your retarded way of putting it, for YOU. Which you regard as being totally better than being more fair for anyone else. I get it.

You're the one who profits most from the status quo. How dare anyone demand a change?

And i once did care for the game.

But not often have i been as deeply disappointed by anything as i've been by this game.

Edited by user1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about being able to place a land claim flag in lawless. The radius would be a lot smaller. Enough to accommodate a ship yard and piece of land to build on. Costs gold to keep area. A distance restriction could be put into place where no two flags could overlap or be in proximity of each other so as not to prevent access to the island. Maximum number of players in each lawless group. Possibly no allies so a large company couldn’t split into small groups, ally and control a whole island. Same timer, 9 hours PVP window. 
 

Not everyone wants to play in large groups. I don’t because lag spikes get on my tits, the restrictions company owners and admin put on their members is annoying AF and I don’t like 100% of the human population. Not all company leaders are competent, friendly of helpful. And I shouldn’t have to waste my time trying to find a big team who I get on with. I play with friends because they are like minded individuals, hence why they are friends. Rando’s are annoying AF. Kids are annoying AF. Being told you have to join our discord group is annoying AF. I just want to play the fudging game and have fun whilst doing so. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

single player brah. if you can't hack it in PVP, don't come and whine on the forums. I've had the same brig for weeks now. No issues. I haven't logged in for almost 2 days. I'm sure it's still fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2019 at 6:40 PM, WhiskeyBarrel said:

You wouldn't be safe. All your gear and items on your ship would still be at risk but I suggest not being able to lose your ship in ~10 mins when it's green anchored. I know it's prob hard to understand if your a moms house basement dweller, but ppl have lives and losing your ship that takes a day to rebuild every time you have to unexpectedly step out for a bit WILL drive away the pop again. Your supporting/promoting design flaws that will drive this game under, again.

Im almost there im xbox user im about to ask for a redund game is big flawed unless like he said hand. Basment dweller

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can not protect your ship or tames as solo player but you can protect everything else... even if you are in a large company it is pretty hard to protect ships and tames...

 

pretty confused about the gold cost of ships as it is super fun to build ships... aslong as this stays i never build something larger than a sloop...

(actually i do not enjoy sailing cuz it takes so long but the fights were fun)

 

personally i think that if you can not get over it and insist on playing solo -> go play pve

 

harsh words? actually even if you would be able to claim land "as solo or -5 player company" any other player or company would strip you  just for fun...

 

IF all ships + tames etc would be safe as soon as you are offline the whole server would be cluttered/stressed... players tend to build xxx ships and tame xxx creatures...

Edited by Wichtelman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wichtelman said:

IF all ships + tames etc would be safe as soon as you are offline the whole server would be cluttered/stressed... players tend to build xxx ships and tame xxx creatures...

You stated a problem as if it must be so, then unknowingly provided the answer.

"X" as you used it is just a variable. The exact same as in a games coding. The amount of ships allowed per company is also a "X" in the Atlas coding. It says something like "300" right now. It could be changed to say "50". Or it could be a factor, something to the effect of "x= company member count", or "x= 2(company member count)".

The point is, this is a non issue. People make too many boats? Reduce the allowable build limit. As it is now every person can make hundreds of boats, and tame hundreds of tames per grid. But that's all literally just a singe variable in the code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that it should be no issue is true but it has not changed since when? well 5k gold for a schooner is also a joke...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 They already added lame armored docks, that nobody can destroy and u can basically not steal ships.

Instead of adding intelligent NPCs that fight like Players and protect ur ships with cannosn and mortars they add Puckles that are totally cancerous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2021 at 9:16 PM, chukiki said:

 They already added lame armored docks, that nobody can destroy and u can basically not steal ships.

Factually incorrect.

 

On 2/12/2021 at 9:16 PM, chukiki said:

Instead of adding intelligent NPCs that fight like Players and protect ur ships with cannosn and mortars they add Puckles that are totally cancerous

I believe they contacted Elon Musk about some AI for their game NPCs. He said no.

I assume you are not aware that a cannon on a cart outranges NPCs. Puckles are really good against noobs. An avid offline raider such as yourself should really know these things.

I do hope you improve your skills as a pirate. Its getting embarrassing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...