Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
actionandy99

Claim System

Recommended Posts

New claim system will come when the devs are no longer drunk from sylvester ūüôā

Will be useless. Yesterday a chinese clan raided a superfortress that i built up during the last 2 weeks. 12 stone layers with internal roof crossings, about 50 turrets with overlapping fire arcs (i am officer in the german army).... about 7 minutes work for the chinese ants.

Defence always was and still currently is a joke in ARK and ATLAS.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will remind you if you are a military officer that a static defence is no defence against a mobile attacker. All you did was create a puzzle for the enemy to overcome.

The whole build a fort concept is ridiculously flawed. the only way of defending in this game is have 24hr cover or hide in a free port.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     I think somewhere in Announcements it was recently referred to as a variation of the original system.

The primary difference being that instead of a flag it will be more of a defensive tower, possibly w hit points and defensive armaments.

I didn't start playing until Season 3, but, you can find the original system in Youtube videos ~2years old.

If anyone wants to corroborate or elaborate w SPECIFIC QUOTES from the devs it would be appreciated, or, god forbid, a dev/ community manager wants to participate in a discussion w their alpha/ beta testers....

     @Garfi I empathize w your disappointment that they think this will create a fun game, however, i have to disagree w your conclusions. Theoretically they could make it so OP that its impossible to destroy (It is a video game after all) . That being said, depending on how its implemented, it will likely lead to miserable PvP. Even then, Megas would just employ the Ceasarian Strategy used against the Gauls, erecting a double-sided/ defendable wall around the claim until the small clan gets pissed off and quits, or just logs in to maintain repairs out of spite.

    *disclaimer* This prediction is being made w minimal info, far in advance, and gives the developers time to prevent the results described

      @Dev Crusher just a sidenote, as a military veteran, i really enjoyed your concise and logical base description.

Ranger out

Edited by Ranger1k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the reason I don't play Atlas PvP.  I am interested in ship combat though.  In almost all serious PvP games they have spawning areas that are off limits to the enemy team.  The PvP objectives should be away from the spawn area.  This all goes back to the fact that there is no real PvP system in place in the first place.  It feels like an experiment, not like they really sat down and thought about it.  They should have server factions to join and objectives.  If the objectives need to feature land based-warfare then fine, make some islands with objectives on them but also have safe zones for players to stash their valuables.  There needs to be a reward to the PvP other than all the other guy's stuff.  Add PvP tokens and a vendor with aesthetic rewards.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@eeeceee please reread @McDangles post.

1. It's absolutely clear he's familiar w PvP in Atlas

2. Furthermore he's atleast proposing some input towards the things he thinks would improve player experience.

      Also, eeeceee the Claim System is one of the next big projects looming for the dev team. Could you please try to offer some insight as well? You've actually provided some solid points before but then you proceeded to mangle up the conversation w quips and slurs to the point that forward momentum ceases.

Friendly advice eeeceee

Edited by Ranger1k
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it says he doesnt play PVP. Please point out what is supposedly clear that you think I have missed?

The last time quips and slurs were mangling up anything, it was when I called you out for going out of your way to insult me. Then you just happen to not reply and go spam up other threads. So don't play dumb.
The input that has been proposed in this thread is something that has already been discussed at length, with much more details and insight than that one paragraph. Nobody cared about that input back then, and it seems that providing even less incentive for the devs to care by providing less details and insight is unlikely to have any effect on anything. If you cannot be bothered to go back and look for yourself, that is half of the problem.

My input would be this - anything that the devs say now is not going to hold much water.

FFA PVP is inherently flawed, and there has been no game that is able to work out how to not be flawed. There has been many discussions on factions, with much more thought out posts than any in this thread. There has been many posts about the imbalance between attackers and defenders, and posts about 'objectives' for PVP players. If you didn't notice, most PVP players complete all the content in this game within the first few days, and then its a fight to stave off boredom/start fights with other players for content.

Meh whatever, cbf talking to newbies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, McDangles said:

 It feels like an experiment, not like they really sat down and thought about it. 

@eeeceee that sentence right there implies familiarity.

Also eeeeceee I'm not the only person who generally ignores you, and it's not anyone playing dumb. Its because YOU think the RANT you just delivered is how to have a conversation. It's not.

 

3 hours ago, eeeceee said:

If you didn't notice, most PVP players complete all the content in this game within the first few days, and then its a fight to stave off boredom/start fights with other players for content.

     Second correction for ya bud, MOST PvPers have quit the game. Your describing the old guard that still remain. Furthermore your contradicting yourself, meaning, OF COURSE PEOPLE START FIGHTS ON PVP...ITS.....   P     V      P.  Fighting other players IS PART OF THE CONTENT BY DESIGN....

 

3 hours ago, eeeceee said:

FFA PVP is inherently flawed, and there has been no game that is able to work out how to not be flawed.

     Final correction for ya bud, FFA PvP isn't inherently flawed, its all about implementation. For example take a FPS PvP game w a FFA Arena, if I can't spawn in because its camped then the IMPLEMENTATION is flawed, not the concept. Theres VERY successful games THRIVING w a FFA format.

     Its the implementation that most people feel is flawed, not the format. @McDangles, @Dev Crusher, @Garfi, possibly OP and myself would love to be able to sail the open seas and blast eachother, but theres TOO MANY FLAWS in the IMPLEMENTATION. The problems are many but generally boil down to atleast 2 things

1 The risk vs reward is skewed incorrectly

2 A base is required to be able to PvP at the desired ship level

Theres a ton more but I'm not typing a dissertation.

 

Regardarding your halfbaked personal attacks, ūü•Ī

 

Now, goodbye eeeceee

Edited by Ranger1k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ranger1k said:

     Final correction for ya bud, FFA PvP isn't inherently flawed, its all about implementation. For example take a FPS PvP game w a FFA Arena, if I can't spawn in because its camped then the IMPLEMENTATION is flawed, not the concept. Theres VERY successful games THRIVING w a FFA format.

     Its the implementation thats most people feel is flawed, not the format. @McDangles, @Dev Crusher, @Garfi, possibly OP and myself would love to be able to sail the open seas and blast eachother, but theres TOO MANY FLAWS in the IMPLEMENTATION. The problems are many but generally boil down to atleast 2 things

1 The risk vs reward is skewed incorrectly

2 A base is required to be able to PvP at the desired ship level

What McDngles is asking for is basically an arena game like Sea of thieves with set teams, fixed spawns etc. For a game like that to be good you need to have really good game mechanics, balance, high skill ceiling and diverse playstyles so you can have an evolving meta.

This game have awefull game mechanics, a meta that have been stagnant for over a year, 2 viable weapons and a skill ceiling you can be reach in 15 fucking minutes. PvP in this game is basically the equivelant of playing CS GO with nothing but Kniferounds or Overwatch with 12 Reinhardts. 

Risk vs reward is the only thing this game have going for it, If you remove it its like playing poker without money. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, eeeceee said:

Such a big man, insulting people an

What a surprise, more insults and no reply. As I suggested, maybe "thinking" is not the best option for you, and you should just fuck off?

Lol Reinhardsts.

If risk vs reward is the only thing this game has going for it, well, pve newbies love playing poker without money or risk. Then spam the forums all day.

Theres almost more contradictions in that post then there are words.

Edited by Pant
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Pant

Just to clarify, my initial point (please scroll up) wasn't advocating for @McDangles vision of how the game should be designed. I have my own vision. I was simply pointing out to eeeceee that it was obvious that he's clearly familiar w Atlas PvP. Please scroll up to my initial remarks to eeeceee and let me know if you agree.

     Also I said the risk vs reward was skewed incorrectly. I didn't say to remove it. This also gets into the territory of subjective opinion, specifically, how much risk vs how much reward. Also definitions come into play here. Also the games target audience factors in. I'll try to tie it up w a simple example.. Losing 3 hours of grinding in a fight might be an acceptable risk for the "reward" of a fun fight to one person, however, for another person it may be an unacceptable time investment requirement for the "reward" of a fun fight. @Pant I think we can both agree neither person is "wrong" in their opinion... Lets take it one step further even, everything could stay exactly as is w the game BUT a simple lobby could be added w a PvP arena. Zero grind required but @McDangles and I get to battle eachother w equally equipped ships. We can agree many people would find that fun i think, no?

     On several points we're in agreement. Specifically current PvP mechanics. If you feel like elaborating on what you like about the risk/ reward, i value your opinion.

Edited by Ranger1k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Pant said:

Theres almost more contradictions in that post then there are words.

*than.

And yeah, whatever? Show me what contradictions you are talking about?

14 minutes ago, Ranger1k said:

clearly familiar w Atlas PvP. Please scroll up to my initial remarks to eeeceee and let me know if you agree.

Why don't you take you own advice, and scroll up and show where this person is familiar with PVP? Also, I wonder why don't you respond to what I have posted? Lol newbie...

14 minutes ago, Ranger1k said:

     Also I said the risk vs reward was sk

ewed incorrectly. I didn't say to remove it. This also gets into the territory of subjective opinion, specifically, how much risk vs how much reward. Also definitions come into play here. Also the games target audience factors in. I'll try to tie it up w a simple example.. Losing 3 hours of grinding in a fight might be an acceptable risk for the "reward" of a fun fight to one person, however, for another person it may be an unacceptable time investment requirement for the "reward" of a fun fight. @Pant I think we can both agree neither person is "wrong" in their opinion... Lets take it one step further even, everything could stay exactly as is w the game BUT a simple lobby could be added w a PvP arena. Zero grind required but McDangles and I get to battle eachother w equally equipped ships. We can agree many people would find that fun i think, no?

     On several points we're in agreement. Specifically current PvP mechanics. If you feel like elaborating on what you like about the risk/ reward, i value your opinion.

What are you trying to talk about? Are you trying to talk about the claim system?

You want a arena for PVE newbies to fight each other? You and McDangles fight each other with equally equipped ships, yet your'e a newbie and McDangles would most likely wipe your sorry ass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope that they will bring the original claim system back.

As the moment this peace-war system is pure trash.

in the original you had to invest time into counterclaiming the flags, so that that you eventually could place your mortars in range of the enemys pillar fortress. By no mega tribes can steamroll whomever they want in MINUTES, no matter how many puckels, walls and cannons you place,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dev Crusher said:

I really hope that they will bring the original claim system back.

As the moment this peace-war system is pure trash.

in the original you had to invest time into counterclaiming the flags, so that that you eventually could place your mortars in range of the enemys pillar fortress. By no mega tribes can steamroll whomever they want in MINUTES, no matter how many puckels, walls and cannons you place,

This post is pure trash.

Do you even remember the original claim system, or recall why it got changed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dev Crusher said:

I really hope that they will bring the original claim system back.

As the moment this peace-war system is pure trash.

in the original you had to invest time into counterclaiming the flags, so that that you eventually could place your mortars in range of the enemys pillar fortress. By no mega tribes can steamroll whomever they want in MINUTES, no matter how many puckels, walls and cannons you place,

In the original system you had to stay up 24/7 so ppl wouldn't take your shit overnight, I dont miss it at all.

Eastern islands werent in the game in season 1 either. I very much doubt a mortar can reach a pillar base on an eastern island. If you build right on an eastern island pillar in the current system there's nothing a mega can do to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@actionandy99, @Pant, @Dev Crusher, @Garfi, @McDangles

Found it. Its under the 11/24/20 Sailing Forward Q&A/ Announcements..

We are looking into rebooting the original claim system that allowed players to take over a section of the island.  This is done by placing down a claim  structure that takes longer to build and is more robust than a claim flag.  It may also have its own defenses.  Once fully built, it will have to be destroyed for you to lose your claim and everything that goes along with it. We are not completely reverting back to the old claim system, but will be taking the original concept and building off of it. We are currently still testing some ideas.

 

Edited by Ranger1k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Theres also this in the 12/21/20 V519.5 patch notes/ Announcements

Previously we discussed a rework on the Claim System. Originally, we intended to introduce this by the end of this year. As things move in development and new challenges present themselves, timelines and ideas can often change. We are still working on the new Claim System’s implementation and testing it. It will likely not be introduced until early next year. Many were concerned that a rework of the Claim System would bring about a wipe. Although wipes are inevitable in EA, we also do our best to wipe only when it is absolutely necessary. At this time there is no estimated or set date for a wipe and we will keep the community updated if that changes.

 

As the last patch of the year, the ATLAS team will be setting sail for a small holiday break. The next scheduled patch will be the week of January 11.

 

Edited by Ranger1k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds very promising, dependent somehow on the strength of the new claim flags. This would make battle for island control challenging.

But if the new claim flags are equal in power to the sea forts it will be a very short campaign of conquerage ūüėā

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old system was quite good for pve ( for pvp I dont think this matter that much, just removing any claim system would work I think ), apart from a few bugs and necessary tweeks, I hope they do the right thing otherwise this game will be singleplayer / friends coop only :

Old system : 

- Bugs: Sometimes the timer bugs and you could not take control of other abandoned flags, the counter shows negative with no explanation.

- Tweeks:  If someone was sleeping ( but abandoned the game for months ), all the intersection area of circles would be imune for ever, it should be tweeked to be imune  only in the circle where the person is sleeping, allowing other players to take control of the other flags, and eventually, the sleeping body should be removed from the game ( after a few months maybe ) if the player dont log in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have all been solved by moving to a 3 or 4 faction system. They want more action at sea? Let different factions set sail and take over another. I remember the original claim system and all you saw was spamming flags as far as the eye can see, if that comes back I won't be back.

All the water on the server is wasted, they could just increase the islands to give more people a chance to build. People are running around islands while the sea is empty, doesn't make sense. If they had more things on the sea I probably could understand but sailing across water just to get to a small island, pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about having factions, if only because it gives a near automatic level playing field. Having played ESO for years and doing loads of pvp, I think 3 factions is the perfect number for constant fighting. Although you do find sometimes factions gang up together if they lose too often. But 3 factions is perfect for a pyrate game, Naval, Traders, and Pyrates. Each with their own unique attacks etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A faction system is not going to level the playing field. The big alliances that are already established will just join a faction with the alliance they are already in, continue the same war, sit on the same discord and they won't give two shits about the random bobs in the faction for the same reason they don't care about random bobs now. Defending people is time and effort. Preparing kits, food, tames for pvp takes a lot of hours, doing all that for some random bob that sits on a mountain and breed cows all day just isn't worth the time.

All you accomplish with a faction system is add a metric shit ton of ways to grief. People willmake alts and join the other factions to grief them. If you have friendly fire off they will build shit around your boats, tames, fence spam islands etc. If you leave friendly fire on they will just kill tames, raid bases, sink ships and you basically don't have a faction system at all. You can't have factions without completly revamping the build system or removing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If done properly, factions will give smaller groups and solo players more chance in the game. And there would be no need to remove building or altering it too much, after all a faction is simply a different flag is it not? You also get players who will always join the underdog, just for the sheer hell of it. There's nothing better in pvp imo than beating your opponent when the odds are totally stacked against it. And seriously I don't see how factions could make it any worse than it is now for the solo or small group anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they could take inspiration from the Golden Age of Piracy in the Caribbean - have factions representing the different nations that originally fought over the Caribbean (English - French - Spanish - Dutch - Natives) - but have the players have to gain a Letter of Marque from one of these factions to get the benefits or be un-alligned.

Factions would offer quests or missions for players to complete (randomly generated) but along the basic premise of virtually any video game quest or mission system (fetch/kill/destroy). The rewards would be payment in gold and increase in reputation for the quest giver and decrease in reputation for the effected faction.

Factions should have their own goals (set by the devs frequently) which require players to supply resources of a large amount requiring group efforts or defend locations over a long period of time. Assisting with these goals would increase a players "reputation" with the faction and offer rewards such as gold or rare items.

Reputation would gain access to harder quests with greater rewards.

Each faction should have its own trade routes which could be attacked by opposing factions and pirates and defended by the traders faction players. A successful attack on a trade route would cause the attacked faction to run short on whatever supplies the traders were delivering and thus the faction would then offer quests related to this.

Players could then take on the roles of traders/pirates/faction navy and work to make their faction the strongest in the world.

NB. Factions wouldn't be something someone chooses and is then stuck with. completing quests for a faction would improve your reputation with that faction but reduce it with opposed factions. Get enough reputation with a faction and you can get a letter of Marque and fly the factions flag. Have a low enough reputation with another faction and get hunted as a pirate by that faction.

This is quite heavily inspired by the way Elite Dangerous works but feel with a game of the magnitude of Atlas it could learn a lot from Elite Dangerous.

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...