New PVP Changes Will Be The End Of Atlas

[Bullet Force 151]

These new changes to PVP if implemented will definitively spell the end of Atlas as game. There can be no doubt that with these changes the bulk of PVP players - those who purchased and play PVP for the sake of PVP will depart the game for good and with them will go the majority of your player base.

I am one of them but I am not alone. I know of many others. Good solid players that can tolerate their base being blown up while they are offline. Players that can tolerate their mythic galleon being sunk by an explosive barrel and their high level tames dieing to alpha snakes in their enclosed pens. These are players with endurance and grit true PVP players but these players cannot stomach the thought that they no longer have freedom of action in an open world sandbox game.

The player count has already begun its death spiral and is now averaging a little more then 1000 a day. If you the developers wish to reverse this course you will need to revisit what made games like Atlas and ARK successful in the first place and why altering a winning formula has proven to be extremely unpopular among your player base.

I implore you as developers to change course while you still can. You still have time to rethink these insane ideas fostered upon you by a small loud vocal minority on this forum who never really liked PVP in the first place. 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Bullet Force

[Back Stabbath 150]

lol . Bye. 

I heard in Ark you can still avoid Pvp and blow up peoples stuff while they sleep. You Hardcore animal you.

You can still pretend to be a pvper there.

Remember this post.

You said you are quiting if the don't change their minds. Cause you know...fighting actual players when they are awake isn't really pvp.

[Bandit_Black 46]

2 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

These new changes to PVP if implemented will definitively spell the end of Atlas as game. There can be no doubt that with these changes the bulk of PVP players - those who purchased and play PVP for the sake of PVP will depart the game for good and with them will go the majority of your player base.

I am one of them but I am not alone. I know of many others. Good solid players that can tolerate their base being blown up while they are offline. Players that can tolerate their mythic galleon being sunk by an explosive barrel and their high level tames dieing to alpha snakes in their enclosed pens. These are players with endurance and grit true PVP players but these players cannot stomach the thought that they no longer have freedom of action in an open world sandbox game.

The player count has already begun its death spiral and is now averaging a little more then 1000 a day. If you the developers wish to reverse this course you will need revisit what made games like Atlas and ARK successful in the first place and why altering a winning formula has proven to be extremely unpopular among your players.

I implore you as developers to change course while you still can. You still have time to rethink these insane ideas fostered upon you by a small loud vocal minority on this forum who never really liked PVP in the first place. 

I am with you on this. PvP servers are about freedom. Freedom to kill who you want when you want, raid bases when you want and to constantly have the threat of danger of it happening to you. That's what makes it fun.

I agree with you on all points. I am one of those people and yes there are alot of us who will endure whatever because we enjoy all aspects of "PvP Server"

Our servers are being converted into half pve, no longer survival imo.

 However, a survival mmo from a business standpoint can't support this ruleset. But look at pve, it was just as bad with numbers so where did all those people go.

The real reason this game is lacking is from lack of pve. Ships not being durable enough so they get sunk at night. Bases easily raidable and not strong enough walls by taking one flag and dropping mortars. And we are in the gimme gimme generation. Games like this need wolves and sheep to be able to coexist like ARK did.

So while I think you are right and atlas will die, I will try the changes, hopefully they aren't as carebear as at first glance. But I have my doubts.

Now we have servers that are half PVE and full PVE. Thats it, no more sneak attacks on larger forces, no more harbor raids. Half the fun is out the window. The freedom is gone.

My clan was not once raided on our main bases until the wipe announcement when everyone quit after the wipe announcement. Ships sunk yes, raided no.

Edited March 16, 2019 by Bandit_Black

[Alasson 46]

2 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

These new changes to PVP if implemented will definitively spell the end of Atlas as game. There can be no doubt that with these changes the bulk of PVP players - those who purchased and play PVP for the sake of PVP will depart the game for good and with them will go the majority of your player base.

I am one of them but I am not alone. I know of many others. Good solid players that can tolerate their base being blown up while they are offline. Players that can tolerate their mythic galleon being sunk by an explosive barrel and their high level tames dieing to alpha snakes in their enclosed pens. These are players with endurance and grit true PVP players but these players cannot stomach the thought that they no longer have freedom of action in an open world sandbox game.

The player count has already begun its death spiral and is now averaging a little more then 1000 a day. If you the developers wish to reverse this course you will need revisit what made games like Atlas and ARK successful in the first place and why altering a winning formula has proven to be extremely unpopular among your players.

I implore you as developers to change course while you still can. You still have time to rethink these insane ideas fostered upon you by a small loud vocal minority on this forum who never really liked PVP in the first place. 

so these "PVP HARDCORE PLAYERS" basically love to offline raid empty base/ship, but they hate have players to actually fight?

these "SANDBOX PVP HC 100% FREE OF ACTION" players are strange guys.

Once they were called carebears, basically the real "ATLAS HARDCORE PLAYERS" are the one who avoids pvp...

Proud to be a "casual pvp player" who actually enjoys doing pvp with other real players ^^

Edited March 16, 2019 by Alasson

[Bandit_Black 46]

9 minutes ago, Alasson said:

so these "PVP HARDCORE PLAYERS" basically love to offline raid empty base/ship, but they hate have players to actually fight?

these "SANDBOX PVP HC 100% FREE OF ACTION" players are strange guys.

Once they were called carebears, basically the real "ATLAS HARDCORE PLAYERS" are the one who avoids pvp...

Proud to be a "REAL casual pvp player" who actually enjoys doing pvp with other real players ^^

I'd argue that you are wrong, this is the argument pve players make. There are pro's and con's to offline raidng. Yes sometimes people offline raid to exterminate an enemy quietly and quickly. Our alliance always setup primetime raids though. Not everyone is so honorable. Big alliance vs big clan is usually prime time events tho.

If you have a small house, small clan, you are going to get offlined tho. This game isnt meant for small clans.

Our clan combatted this by having all time zone people. So multicultural crew to avoid being offlined, whats hard about that?

Edited March 16, 2019 by Bandit_Black

[Alasson 46]

4 minutes ago, Bandit_Black said:

I'd argue that you are wrong, this is the argument pve players make. There are pro's and con's to offline raidng. Yes sometimes people offline raid to exterminate an enemy quietly and quickly. Our alliance always setup primetime raids though. Not everyone is so honorable. Big alliance vs big clan is usually prime time events tho.

If you have a small house, small clan, you are going to get offlined tho. This game isnt meant for small clans.

where are the pro of being offline raided? lol

You use as defence the pros of being offline raided but you don't even write one? srsly? 

Edited March 16, 2019 by Alasson

[Alias 10]

6 minutes ago, Alasson said:

where are the pro of being offline raided? lol

You use as defence the pros of being offline raided but you don't even write one? srsly? 

The pros of offline raid are that carebears can achieve something. They have to play too...

[Back Stabbath 150]

22 minutes ago, Bandit_Black said:

 'd argue that you are wrong, this is the argument pve players make. There are pro's and con's to offline raidng. Yes sometimes people offline raid to exterminate an enemy quietly and quickly. Our alliance always setup primetime raids though. Not everyone is so honorable. Big alliance vs big clan is usually prime time events tho.

If you have a small house, small clan, you are going to get offlined tho. This game isnt meant for small clans.

Our clan combatted this by having all time zone people. So multicultural crew to avoid being offlined, whats hard about that?

What a load of shit. How is offline raiding fun at any time? 

You are a typical zerg player. 

It PREVENTS pvp. That is the issue. It is carebear bullshit. Now youl have to fight for it .

Granted you fuckers will still zerg the shit out of everything but at least players will have the opportunity to protect their stuff.

Most pvpers can slay the ARK crowd 10 to 1 anyways . But don't Worry you guys roll with 20 or 30 to 1 numbers or more, you should do fine.

[Bullet Force 151]

1 hour ago, Bandit_Black said:

I am with you on this. PvP servers are about freedom. Freedom to kill who you want when you want, raid bases when you want and to constantly have the threat of danger of it happening to you. That's what makes it fun.

I agree with you on all points. I am one of those people and yes there are alot of us who will endure whatever because we enjoy all aspects of "PvP Server"

Our servers are being converted into half pve, no longer survival imo.

 However, a survival mmo from a business standpoint can't support this ruleset. But look at pve, it was just as bad with numbers so where did all those people go.

The real reason this game is lacking is from lack of pve. Ships not being durable enough so they get sunk at night. Bases easily raidable and not strong enough walls by taking one flag and dropping mortars. And we are in the gimme gimme generation. Games like this need wolves and sheep to be able to coexist like ARK did.

So while I think you are right and atlas will die, I will try the changes, hopefully they aren't as carebear as at first glance. But I have my doubts.

Now we have servers that are half PVE and full PVE. Thats it, no more sneak attacks on larger forces, no more harbor raids. Half the fun is out the window. The freedom is gone.

My clan was not once raided on our main bases until the wipe announcement when everyone quit after the wipe announcement. Ships sunk yes, raided no.

I would also argue that the game lacks a lot of PVP content. When you look at it there is really only 3 viable ships for PVP: schooner, brig and galleon. The other two the raft and the sloop are too weak and to slow to be really useful. The same is true for weapons 2 type of cannon for ships and 3 ranged weapons on foot. The game is really lacking in variety.

[Bullet Force 151]

1 hour ago, Bandit_Black said:

I'd argue that you are wrong, this is the argument pve players make. There are pro's and con's to offline raidng. Yes sometimes people offline raid to exterminate an enemy quietly and quickly. Our alliance always setup primetime raids though. Not everyone is so honorable. Big alliance vs big clan is usually prime time events tho.

If you have a small house, small clan, you are going to get offlined tho. This game isnt meant for small clans.

Our clan combatted this by having all time zone people. So multicultural crew to avoid being offlined, whats hard about that?

Yep this game isn't meant to be for solo players. Also its pretty easy to spam stone structures that make raiding your base hardly worthwhile even for a large tribe.

Also this whole offline raiding issue is completely exaggerated by a few noisy folks on here to serve their own interests. The majority of raiding at least that of which I have been part on has been against other companies that have been not just online but in the same area/at their base at that time. I didn't go out of my way to raid them when they were online it just happened that they were and the reason they were online is because those that aren't tiny companies will normally have players from different timezones playing in their group as that is a logical and smart way to play and defend your base.

This whole offline raiding problem doesn't exist. It's a myth concocted by a vocal minority on this forum in order to change the game to their liking.

[MajorAvatar 28]

20 minutes ago, Bullet Force said:

I would also argue that the game lacks a lot of PVP content. When you look at it there is really only 3 viable ships for PVP: schooner, brig and galleon. The other two the raft and the sloop are too weak and to slow to be really useful. The same is true for weapons 2 type of cannon for ships and 3 ranged weapons on foot. The game is really lacking in variety.

I agree with that statement.

15 minutes ago, Bullet Force said:

Also this whole offline raiding issue is completely exaggerated by a few noisy folks on here to serve their own interests. The majority of raiding at least that of which I have been part on has been against other companies that have been not just online but in the same area/at their base at that time. I didn't go out of my way to raid them when they were online it just happened that they were and the reason they were online is because those that aren't tiny companies will normally have players from different timezones playing in their group as that is a logical and smart way to play and defend your base.

2

You focus yet again, on bases. The game should be moving towards ship warfare, that is what it is doing. Ships do need a safe place if they're not being used. Freeports are not an option, due to fast decay, that said it is a missed opportunity to make safe havens for offline boats, on the other side the ports likely would be flooded with ships.

So they go for offline raid protection 15 hours per day, with an attack window of 9 hours a day unless declared war upon. Sounds like a good idea to me. Your argument is basically to get more people in the company from different timezones and on top of that, all in the company should dedicate a lot of hours a day just to babysit the base. That takes the whole game spirit away: explore, do sea battles and do the new content they will release now, hopefully even more over time.

Not sure why you like to sit around 12 hours a day to defend the company base, i have a life and want to do fun things in a game, including PvP, explore, naval battles and thanks to the 15 hours a day protection, i get to do that without having to draft in unknown players to babysit our base, when were offline.

 

 

[Back Stabbath 150]

21 minutes ago, MajorAvatar said:

I agree with that statement.

You focus yet again, on bases. The game should be moving towards ship warfare, that is what it is doing. Ships do need a safe place if they're not being used. Freeports are not an option, due to fast decay, that said it is a missed opportunity to make safe havens for offline boats, on the other side the ports likely would be flooded with ships.

So they go for offline raid protection 15 hours per day, with an attack window of 9 hours a day unless declared war upon. Sounds like a good idea to me. Your argument is basically to get more people in the company from different timezones and on top of that, all in the company should dedicate a lot of hours a day just to babysit the base. That takes the whole game spirit away: explore, do sea battles and do the new content they will release now, hopefully even more over time.

Not sure why you like to sit around 12 hours a day to defend the company base, i have a life and want to do fun things in a game, including PvP, explore, naval battles and thanks to the 15 hours a day protection, i get to do that without having to draft in unknown players to babysit our base, when were offline.

 

 

He doesnt think like a normal player. He doesnt pvp. He fears pvp.

He is part of a massive zerg. What he fears most is the loss of his 750 man blanket of protection. Hes already losing his cloak of offline invulnerability and hes threatening to quit.

 

[Alias 10]

Yeah all these pro hardcore players who just sit in a zerg company is laughable xD

 

[DocOlds 20]

The problem I see is the people that quit because they couldn't cut it under the old rules are just going to quit again when they get wrecked and lose their safe space.  This update is going to give the mega tribes more protection while making it harder to live on lawless, which is where most small companies are.  Sprinkle in some limits on allys so the small groups can't get any real numbers together for battle and big tribes can't ally with you because they don't have slots and this seems like a recipe for disaster.

[J.Nick 3]

So I am not a huge fan of the new changes but I think we need a change. I was part of a small clan on lawless got wiped off the face of the earth 3 times and rebuilt everytime. So we joined up with a bigger group. I am not saying I am an expert but I think I can say I have experience with both so know what it is actually like. As a small group it was impossible to stop offline raiding and it sucked we even joined an island wide alliance and the whole island got wiped. I think the changes will not kill the pvp, most of the players in the beginning were in those small groups that could not cut it. If this was the real world there would be freedom and no time resteicons but the thing is, most of the people that wanted to play do have time restrictions. I know ark did not have them and ark was great but it also was not as easy to change servers/ sectors in ark as atlas. For a game like atlas to be successful, in my opinion, you need something like the raid hours. I know it is not hardcore and call me soft but maybe the game style of hardcore from the earlier games died off for a reason. The fact is most of the players are not hardcore pvp guys so if you want a highly populated game you can not have it like that. I could be wrong maybe the update will kill the game but at least it is an attempt at bettering the game.

[DocOlds 20]

A change was needed, but giving the powerful protections that the weak need while making it harder to live in the weak zone wasn't even close to the solution.

[Mike L 71]

The main problem with the change is the way they are limiting alliances, to cut out small companies, it should be a player limit, not company limit. 

Other than that the OP described why the player base left in the first place, mythical ships being destroyed, and one cannon bear raiding all of your stuff while your offline, there is no amount of skill in the game that makes you happy about this. 

Because of those alliance settings alone though, small companies/ small alliances wont be able to hold claims, if they change the limit to say 500 or 1000 players, then I agree the rest of the changes will funnel and help cause more PVP. 

[Back Stabbath 150]

They are going about it the wrong way. Capping numbers is going to be a nuisance to the zergs at best 

The best way to allow smaller companies to compete would be to limit fast travel substantially.

If there was no fast travel or if it was at least limited to zones or something they would not be able to defend these huge swaths of the map. 

 

[Sneakydude 143]

End of atlas? are you joking.. maybe the end of some of the meta groups but it wont end.

[Mike L 71]

2 hours ago, Back Stabbath said:

If there was no fast travel or if it was at least limited to zones or something they would not be able to defend these huge swaths of the map. 

 

Sorry I disagree here, if they changed it to no fast travel, everything and everyone would be offline raided anytime they went to do anything. 

Not only would it hurt small companies more than large ones ,but all your base and stuff you collect would be gone the second somebody kills ya. With no fast travel there would be no spawning besides at the Freeport, since anything else could be exploited to let you spawn where you want. 

So someone snipes you while your unaware and you just lost! Lost everything if they have cannon balls, and everyone would develop as close as they can to a Freeport, so they can get back to their stuff fast.

Ever played H1Z1 servers? That is a no bed spawn survival game, and that was the worst part, you had to spawn in the world and run to your base, which makes defending a nightmare, especially since the players learn which direction your coming from, stopping you while your naked with nothing is easy, which means you have to find things to use which aren't in your base to stop them. 

Which makes your base kind of pointless in the first place, see my point? Why not just gear out and look for players to shoot?

This game wouldn't be much different than h1z1 servers without fast travel. 

Edited March 17, 2019 by Mike L

[Captain Jack Shadow 488]

1 hour ago, Back Stabbath said:

They are going about it the wrong way. Capping numbers is going to be a nuisance to the zergs at best 

The best way to allow smaller companies to compete would be to limit fast travel substantially.

If there was no fast travel or if it was at least limited to zones or something they would not be able to defend these huge swaths of the map. 

 

The only problem with that is that if I am in a company of 25, how would I be free to leave my island, or grid, to get things done, like farm resources, or do treasure maps, or hunt whales, when by doing so, and taking 6 of the 12 people online, will put us in serious jeopardy?  I think we can agree that there are no easy answers in a game like this.  Balance is easy for Call of Duty.  Balance in a game like this, is incredibly hard.

An answer might be to have Atlas split into two warring sides?  Both halves of the Map can be mirror images of each other, even if not totally alike.  Same amount of islands, same amount of resources, same amount of tames, same biomes, etc....

[Enki Anunnaki 240]

Look if we lose players on official pvp because they cant offline raid anymore then that is for the best. there will be plenty of private servers where you can offline raid each other. Have fun with that. see, i live for pvp content, but id much rather fight people instead of just blowing up ships that are anchored and causing misery to those who arent even online to feel it yet. the changes proposed are gonna force you to actually fight PEOPLE. I know, it's so sad.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Enki Anunnaki
boo fuckin hoo

[Bullet Force 151]

10 hours ago, DocOlds said:

The problem I see is the people that quit because they couldn't cut it under the old rules are just going to quit again when they get wrecked and lose their safe space.  This update is going to give the mega tribes more protection while making it harder to live on lawless, which is where most small companies are.  Sprinkle in some limits on allys so the small groups can't get any real numbers together for battle and big tribes can't ally with you because they don't have slots and this seems like a recipe for disaster.

Yep as I have said many times  these changes are not to the benefit of small companies. I played ARK for years from the first week of release until Atlas came out. In that time I was in several mega tribes but I also played a solid year as a sort of guerrilla in a very successful small 5 man team. I can tell you the differences in the way you have to approach the game between the two are vast. A giant chasm in many respects. Life in a mega tribe is on the whole pretty casual and laid back.

On the other hand if you are in a small tribe you really need to pick your fights well and do a lot of groundwork before raids to maximize your advantage. One of the reasons we were successful against larger tribes in ARK was in part because we always had the advantage of surprise. We chose the time and place where we would attack, they had no idea we would be coming. We did a lot of recon on enemy bases, worked out their weak/blind spots and chose our targets carefully.

With these new changes to Atlas however it is no longer possible to have the element of surprise. Do the devs really expect a small company of 20 to buy an expensive war token to declare war on a tribe of several hundred and have the faintest hope of succeeding? It really is quite out of the question. These changes will be a disaster for smaller companies, they will be reduced to the status of perpetual defenders. Never able to go on the offensive always on the back foot defending. 

[Talono 434]

Unfortunately the new concept is not „half PVE“. With that i could live, it is the pillar of the EVE ONLINE success. So freeports/lawless PVE, rest PVP.

What we receive is a strange megatribe protection concept combined with a slavery system for smaller tribes.

Can never work.

Dear weak megatribe players : Please stop your whining about offline raiding. You are never offline, as some dozend of your 1000 people will certainly always be online to defend your stuff. 

Opposite to us smaller tribes.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Talono

[Bullet Force 151]

7 hours ago, Talono said:

Unfortunately the new concept is not „half PVE“. With that i could live, it is the pillar of the EVE ONLINE success. So freeports/lawless PVE, rest PVP.

What we receive is a strange megatribe protection concept combined with a slavery system for smaller tribes.

Can never work.

Dear weak megatribe players : Please stop your whining about offline raiding. You are never offline, as some dozend of your 1000 people will certainly always be online to defend your stuff. 

Opposite to us smaller tribes.

Exactly this new system will be the death of small companies which ironically is where most of the people demanding these changes hail from. For them it will be a rather bitter irony once these changes actually sink in, once they have actually given it some thought. 

A small company post patch will have no freedom of action, no ability to exploit enemy weaknesses. Unable to go on the offensive and perpetually stuck in a defensive posture they will just be easy cannon fodder for larger groups.

It's a shame really this game had a lot of potential but unfortunately the devs caved in to vocal minorities who don't even understand the basic mechanics of the game.