Limit Company Rosters

[Hayzed 1]

THere is no reason to have a company roster allow more people than the server can handle... server being flooded by one company to prevent raiding on their server or vice versa shouldnt be a strat. IF the server holds 150 lets try limiting the companies to 75 or if the capacity is 200 for the servers then 100. Not sure how this wasnt brought to the table when the server size was established. ALso fix the dam claiming system, 1 claim flag per 10 people in tribe or something, the claim game also should not be a strat.

[Goldfish The Builder 105]

Most companys don't have all their people in one spot at once. 75-100 is only a medium company in a game of this scale though, what would happen and already is is you will just split it into a bunch of slot cap companys

Pirate Co 1

Pirate Co 2

Pirate Co 3

 

... etc

 

Wont solve the issue

[LaiTash 156]

So that solo players complaining about game being unplayable for them had no chance to even find a company to join.

[mndfreeze 92]

Solo players will forever be unhappy and complaining because this game was designed around guild warfare on a large scale.  But shrinking max size won't really fix much in regards to their complaints anyway. 

[Winter Thorne 696]

2 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

Solo players will forever be unhappy and complaining because this game was designed around guild warfare on a large scale.  But shrinking max size won't really fix much in regards to their complaints anyway. 

You should specify whether you're talking about pvp or pve.

Pve certainly isn't based on that.  (And I hope pvp is more than just that)

[LaiTash 156]

> Solo players will forever be unhappy and complaining because this game was designed around guild warfare on a large scale.

Too bad the server hardware was not

[Percieval 1,067]

Yes solo players will never be happy.

This game is not designed around them so I don’t think the devs will ever change it. 

[mndfreeze 92]

1 minute ago, Winter Thorne said:

You should specify whether you're talking about pvp or pve.

Pve certainly isn't based on that.  (And I hope pvp is more than just that)

ARK was designed to be pvp from the beginning and PvE wasn't even a thought until people started throwing fits so it got added in.  Atlas was also designed to be a PVP oriented game so I wouldn't hold out too much hope that it gets specifically balanced around just pve players.  They will focus on things that can be changed on both without negatively impacting it or expect you to play on unofficial.  The devs said they wanted this game to be similar to EVE or other mass scale style games where politics, wars, alliances, trade, social engineering, etc all take place which they definitely do on PVP servers.  

Since a lot of the content is pvp oriented, i.e. ship battles, base raiding, a ton of weapons that are useless against anything other than players it's a pretty fair assumption that PVE in this will be treated about the same as it was in ark and other than easy fixes pve probably won't get a ton of love until the game is farther along.  The exception might be if people are complaining a lot.  The ship weight thing may end up getting addressed somehow if they can do it without breaking the other mechanics associated with it.  Can't just turn it off because its important for pvp.  Can't turn it off on pve because it important to how many people you can load on your boat, the weight, etc.  

[Winter Thorne 696]

11 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

ARK was designed to be pvp from the beginning and PvE wasn't even a thought until people started throwing fits so it got added in.  Atlas was also designed to be a PVP oriented game so I wouldn't hold out too much hope that it gets specifically balanced around just pve players.  

Yes, that's why they started with both pvp and pve servers at  EA launch.   Because non-existent customers were throwing fits about a game they'd never heard of.

13 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

 They will focus on things that can be changed on both without negatively impacting it or expect you to play on unofficial.  

They told you this?  You pal around with them on the weekends?  Have drinks and little nibbly things?  Watch Jane Austen movies?  Can I come too?

16 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

  The devs said they wanted this game to be similar to EVE or other mass scale style games where politics, wars, alliances, trade, social engineering, etc all take place which they definitely do on PVP servers.  

As they also definitely do on pve servers...for decent games, at least.  Some of those don't have wars, some of them do.  Still, all the other things apply.  In good pve games.

 

19 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

 

Since a lot of the content is pvp oriented, i.e. ship battles, base raiding, a ton of weapons that are useless against anything other than players it's a pretty fair assumption that PVE in this will be treated about the same as it was in ark and other than easy fixes pve probably won't get a ton of love until the game is farther along.  

Yep.  Building, taming, sailing, making alliances, trading, growing food and fighting off the wildlife....all that content is pvp oriented.  

22 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

  The exception might be if people are complaining a lot.  

Read the forums much?

22 minutes ago, mndfreeze said:

  The ship weight thing may end up getting addressed somehow if they can do it without breaking the other mechanics associated with it.  Can't just turn it off because its important for pvp.  Can't turn it off on pve because it important to how many people you can load on your boat, the weight, etc.  

Oh, they might address a griefing mechanic unless the one and only solution you've come up with doesn't work for pvp.  I hope they have more imagination than you.

 

Good gigglywiggly, what an exercise in projection some of these comments are getting to be.  Let me condescendingly tell you why this is the game of my dreams and not yours because I have no more info than you, but I want it this way.

Listen up.  Grapeshot either intends for this to be an incredibly rich world with a ton of things to do that appeal to many styles of gaming, or they want to slap something together in the nature of zerg wars, act like they're real game developers, take everyone's money and fade into the sunset.  I'm not saying which it is, because THEY ARE NOT SAYING WHICH IT IS.  Neither should you be saying which it is, and providing lectures to people who probably have decades of experience more than you.  Time will tell and at some point we'll know.  If they choose the latter route, I sincerely hope you all have as much fun as you can with it before it goes bye bye.  Those of us who prefer the former will be long gone.  You should really stop making posts now telling other players that this game is all about you, it's not for them, and pretending you have some inside track on what's happening.

[[616]RexFortis 48]

To be honest, the game developers are biased in favor of large companies, I think they know some of them very personally so I don't think you'll see much done in that department.

[mndfreeze 92]

32 minutes ago, Winter Thorne said:

 Let me condescendingly tell you

You seem salty for no reason. Perhaps take your aggression out elsewhere.  Perhaps try a pvp server.

[Winter Thorne 696]

12 hours ago, mndfreeze said:

You seem salty for no reason. Perhaps take your aggression out elsewhere.  Perhaps try a pvp server.

Not salty in the least.  Just seems like a good idea for other people reading the forums to know that even though there's a small group of you posting as though you have inside information about the design of the game, trying to drive away players with different gaming styles, that you're pulling your factoids straight out of your nether regions, and know no more than anyone else.

I wouldn't want anyone to be influenced to not buy the game or to quit it because they're reading these kinds of comments that come with such an attitude of final authority about them.

[Not Happy 38]

11 minutes ago, Winter Thorne said:

Not salty in the least.  Just seems like a good idea for other people reading the forums to know that even though there's a small group of you posting as though you have inside information about the design of the game, trying to drive away players with different gaming styles, that you're pulling your factoids straight out of your nether regions, and know no more than anyone else.

I wouldn't want anyone to be influenced to not buy the game or to quit it because they're reading these kinds of comments that come with such an attitude of final authority about them.

Lol, I like you Winter.

You're on PvE and I'm on PvP and yet I almost always find I am on the same page as you.

[mndfreeze 92]

18 hours ago, Winter Thorne said:

Not salty in the least.  Just seems like a good idea for other people reading the forums to know that even though there's a small group of you posting as though you have inside information about the design of the game, trying to drive away players with different gaming styles, that you're pulling your factoids straight out of your nether regions, and know no more than anyone else.

I wouldn't want anyone to be influenced to not buy the game or to quit it because they're reading these kinds of comments that come with such an attitude of final authority about them.

You *ARE* salty. You apparently can't read without feeling personally insulted when I said nothing that was condescending.  What I know comes from the interviews they have done in the past, things they have posted and working in a I.T. development field where code release is a day to day task.  Were it such an easy and quick fix like you seem to think it is it would have been done already.  There is a reason I said if people complain enough (they have, its all this forum is) and it still hasn't been addressed.   There are multiple mechanics involved and changing them not only affects the game play design for PvE but could also affect PVP, where its a critical part of game play.  Not to mention if it requires actual back end coding changes vs just server variables in a config file they would have to start a separate repo and maintain 2 different code trees which is generally a big ass NO NO because its a nightmare to maintain.  Just because *YOU* don't understand how development cycles work doesn't mean other people don't.

I also never once said the game 'all about me' like you seem to claim.  Nor did I imply it anywhere. You are just defensive and salty and lashing out like a child.  Feel free to go look at the history of ark's development cycle if you want to see the patterns this team has and go look at interviews for it and this to see the similarities.  My post was all about managed expectations but apparently that idea is foreign to you.  Try to use some logical thinking instead of emotional attitude for once.

[Winter Thorne 696]

4 hours ago, mndfreeze said:

  Just because *YOU* don't understand how development cycles work doesn't mean other people don't.

 

You assume an awful lot about people you don't know.  And there's that "air of authority again, complete with much "codesplaining".

I like the latest Captain's log.  Shows some good indications of the devs intentions and direction for the game, including a "process fix" for the griefing issues until the coding fixes can be arranged, and locked boxes for pve.  If they keep this up,  you might have to stop discouraging pve players from playing the game.

Still not salty in the least.  In fact, I get a pretty good chuckle out of some of this.

 

[mndfreeze 92]

Oh my last message was definitely condescending in response to yours. The first was not however.  Hence my initial reply about you being salty.  As for "codesplaining" forums are here to pass information and knowledge.  If that offends you then you might be in the wrong place.  I do think it's funny though that my "dev indicators" of their past comments are somehow nothing but assumptions but you just listed the same sort of thing and thats "good direction for the game!"

I also don't discourage players from trying to play PvE. It doesn't affect me what so ever if they do or don't nor do I think anyone should be chased away. Again, managed expectations was what my initial post was about.