boomervoncannon

2 minutes ago, Realist said:

Completely agree. When I was reading the patch notes the whole time I was thinking “so once they are gone they are gone?”

then when it says they wouldn’t come back unless the island was empty for a long period of time. I couldn’t help but think there will be a handful of players that experience the WPE and then everyone else is out of luck.

me personally, I really like the idea of the WPE and think the idea of it is awesome, but I am pretty disappointed in how they are doing it unfortunately 

I can't imagine they will stick with this long term. It's a total waste to develop content, especially content your game badly needs, and then have it just be some temporary one time thing. I'd actually be fine if they could pop up even on claimed islands and leave it up to the company that owns the island as to whether to wipe them out early or let them grow a bit to present more of a challenge. Perhaps letting a WPE grow on your island and then eventually knocking it off could have a nice reward. Just spitballing, but yeah it's gotta have some more longevity than what this initial idea seems to imply.

9 minutes ago, Realist said:

In all reality people bait me into it. I wasn’t the first one to bring it up. Winter Thorne was.

as in all other threads if someone brings I up I reply to it. I almost never start the subject. I just reply to it.

That's a fair point kind of like how I'm a sucker for any kind of quote. But at this point all any of us is doing is just regurgitating a discussion that's been done to death. I don't think anyone is going to bring up anything new until at minimum there is actual new information. Lets find something else to talk about. Going back to your OP, while I really like the idea of WPE, I do agree that as they are proposed they seem like they would have a weirdly limited shelf life. I think the devs need to reconsider how they are going to implement them with an eye to making them a long term viable part of gameplay especially for non pvp.

42 minutes ago, eeeceee said:

This reminds me of the diplo in ark.

IDK if the devs can make sailing a compelling experience. IDK how to sail, but I'm sure it's an activity that could be considered fun.

You know, this is a compelling point and one that has been scratching away at the back of my mind from the beginning of this thread. Maybe the reality is that what makes sailing fun is so much an experience that cannot really be replicated in a computer game. Maybe it's the smell of the ocean, the wind on your face, the actual physical labor required to make the ship do as you want. Of all the five senses, a video game can replicate only sight and sound. Maybe the factors that make days or hours at sea enjoyable cannot readily be translated into a game on a screen.

On a personal level I've always found people enjoying watching their avatars dance onscreen for more than say a minute kind of weird. Dancing is an inherently physical activity. The notion that large numbers of people enjoy virtual dancing is something I have a hard time wrapping my head around, but it's the best case for why GrapeCard might be able to make sailing fun in a game despite the sensory gap.

1 hour ago, DoubleHelix said:

You will be surprised how many actually DO cross borders in the middle of the grid at 90 degrees. I have spent most of my 3100+ hours in ATLAS sailing. And I witness this every day. Many players are not familiar with the core sailing mechanics cause they spend most of their time in the game on land. And this IS already dev's fault since we still lack enough sea-based content. You can't get good sailing habits if you sail once in two weeks to the neighbor grid and back.

No argument over this, but as well - it will significantly decrease your chances to find yourself stuck in SotD while the rest of the group are pounding you. Basic self-preservation.

You will be surprised how many people actually are not computer savvy. And this does not stop them to play games. Maybe you should pay attention to the world outside your monitor.

So, I guess you and the guy that started this thread play two different games. Cause Its dev's fault that you have 5 sec and he have 1 min zoning lag, right?

On this I agree. Some do.

In conclusion, cause arguing with a biased person for me is pointless - SotDs and their barrage are part of the game. PC performance is player's issue. And it is survival game. Either you find a way to survive or you die. Simple.

Not surprised at all that not everyone is computer savy and no fair reading of my posts could reasonably come to this conclusion. Maybe you should pay attention to what other people say instead of jumping to erroneous conclusions on their behalf.

I've seen people cross borders at 90 degree angles yes, but your entire argument was predicated on everyone behaving in the least intelligent manner, it made no allowance for players who do play in a savy fashion still experiencing the issue, so stop back pedaling now. No one was arguing that nothing can be done to mitigate SOTD risks, yet this was the strawman position you were arguing against.

As far as any difference between the lag I experience and the OP, all that does is highlight the fact that no one was ever asking for unlimited protection from sotd's, just a brief prevention of targeting to prevent unavoidable incoming damage. Feel free to go on about basic self preservation all you like. Damage I can't mitigate in any fashion because it happens during a lag spike that can only be mitigated incrementally doesn't fall into this category, it is a game design issue by allowing mobs near zoning.

As far as one minute zoning lag I draw to your attention the thread title. No one asked for a minutes worth of protection, they asked for 15 seconds. One minute is a 4x multiplication of that and a figure found nowhere in his post. It appears to be a gross exaggeration you pulled from where the sun don't shine, try again.

You're arguing about survival on an issue where the central point is lack of player ability to do anything due to lag. You've tried repeatedly to drag focus away from that central point or to discredit it with fallacious arguments. No one is or has argued that you don't need to survive in a survival game, so go on with that nonsense, it's not working here. 

For the guy whose bias appears to be assuming everyone is an idiot to talk about the biases of others is pretty rich, thanks for the laugh. Disagreeing with you is not a bias, so stop trying to frame it as one.

1 hour ago, DoubleHelix said:

My zoning lag is about 8-10 seconds. Normal for 2 yrs old rig.

my lag is comparable and that is enough to get pounded if you're unlucky in crossing, despite taking steep angles. This is the core point you refuse to acknowledge.

4 hours ago, Jack Shandy said:

sailing with your mates if always fun, so give them a reason to be there.

1. with a captain at the wheel, if there is a player on the podium - +5% speed, plus an additional 5% divided by number of sails for each sail manned by a player.

2. with a captain at the wheel, manning a cannon will grant your loading and targeting bonuses to the nearest 1-2 NPC's mounted on cannons, a player on the podium will increase this by +1.

3. make cargo racks mountable. With a captain at the wheel, if an NPC is mounted reduce speed penalty by 25%, if a player is mounted reduce the speed penalty by 50%. Increase this value by 25% if there is a player mounted on the podium.

4. inspire the crew with music, ship speed, handling, etc...

(All values are for description purposes and can be changed for balance)

1. While I'm generally against speed increases as the solution to solving sailing tedium, I like your approach because it's about incentivizing other players to come along for the ride, which does increase the chance to have fun together. I like this suggestion.

2. I'd be in favor of making this sort of buff about a player being at the podium since a human player is at the helm almost always, and whether they have the captain skill tree or not isn't really addressing making sailing interesting, but as a general concept yes.

3. Not in favor of adding a bonus for NPC's  mounting the racks as this doesn't really do anything to heighten the experience but just super easily mitigates a penalty the devs have already balanced how they want. The buff for having an actual player mounting the rack sure, because again that's about having friends along to make things fun.

Overall I like the core idea of having incentives in the form of buffs for multiple human players to be on the ship. Solid idea.

*yawns*

Oh look, Realist has hijacked his own thread to talk about something he's never brought up before.

Man those Wild Pirate Encampments sound nice for pve, too bad we can't talk about them.

Dude, this is starting to border on an unhealthy obsession.

It will happen or it won't, either way 

pick up the pieces of life and move on.

14 hours ago, DoubleHelix said:

Angle of border approach. Crossing the border at 90 degrees seriously increases you chance of ramming into SotDs. Especially if you KNOW that you have zoning lag. Here we come to route planning. 

Route planning and accounting wind direction changes when crossing a grid. FYI - 5 degrees upon crossing East-West direction except for O-A crossing where you have a 75 degrees shift plus power change. That again comes with route planning. And again comes to knowledge of game mechanics.

Zoning lag is due to different PC performances. If your PC is weak, you don't choose Ultra settings. You use brain and choose as start Low memory mode, then you lower graphic settings. And as well - you don't run YouTube, PornHub and torrent on background simultaneously.

Yet again we come to an issue with customer's property (his OWN computer). Sorry to disappoint you, but this is NOT GS responsibility. They do not sell PCs. They sell a game that have certain requirements. If your PC falls in these, but is still unable to run smoothly, its 2+2 to check for possible issues on your end too. Its common sense. But ofc, its quite easier to sit in the shit and yell - "Waaa, come wipe my ass"

 

Any other questions?

Multiple fallacious assumptions here that seem to stem from an arrogance of assuming other people are idiots. 

A. I don't do 90 degree zone crossings and haven't since oh I don't know December 23rd maybe. Moreover, I don't know anyone who plays Atlas who does. Do you really think other players are that incompetent that you can assume we're all out there doing this? Regardless of angle of crossing, it will NOT affect the period during which lag means you have no control. I've had to state that this is the issue multiple times now and you continue to put forward arguments dealing with things other than during the zoning lag. Angle of crossing can and does impact how quickly you can react and recross if necessary once you have regained control of your ship after the zoning lag. So again, I don't know if the issue is reading comprehension or willfull misdirection, but you're putting forward something that does not address the point in question: being targetable during lag before you have control back. Angle of crossing has zero impact on this.

B. The arrogance of assuming other players don't know how to  tweak graphic settings or not run memory hogs in the background to increase performance is breathtaking. Stop acting like everyone who plays Atlas besides you is a moron. Yes, I know these things already, have known them long since. What I also know is that the mitigation of zoning lag they can affect is incremental, not overwhelming. My rig is quite solid, I don't play on ultra settings because I'm not super picky about asthetics and the performance is more important to me, yet I still get a solid 5 seconds or so of zoning lag when crossing. Furthermore there are people with less solid rigs that are still within game specs who get at least this and yeah, they've tried tweaking game settings, the mitigation of lag that achieves doesn't drop you from a 10 second eternity to 2 seconds, which is the sort of assumption your "everyone is an idiot and it's not GC's fault you don't know how to use your poo machine" position is based on. It shaves a few seconds off at most, there is some mitigation of the problem, but it does not fundamentally SOLVE it, so stop acting like it does or it can.

Here's the experience I've had twice, crossing borders at shallow angle in arctic, during the 5 or 6 second lag window I experienced, get targeted by an entire high level squadron that happened to be on the other side (probably from chasing another player) and hit with salvos before I could recross even though I was setup to do just that. I didn't get sunk but I took a significant pounding during a window of time I had no control over, so stop with these nonsense arguments that it's all the players fault and get off your high horse. 

Despite your wrongheaded assumptions, other people do have brains, some of them even use them. Are there idiots out there? Plenty, but pretending we're all mouthbreathers to make a disingenuous and fallacious argument that it's all our fault when even players who do the things you've brought up still face this issue is what's absurd.

At the end of the day you're still the guy who said 99% of issues experienced are not the devs or game's fault. Really? That's the hill you're gonna stand on 9 months into one of the worst EA launches in the industry? These guys have so far offered up a game so riddled with issues they've lost 99% of their playerbase and are launching to Xbox in desperation, yet none of this is their fault? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Stop acting like everyone but you is a whiny idiot who can't do anything right. It doesn't make you look good.

34 minutes ago, PeglegTheAngry said:

If you opt into the PTR branch and play on a local server you will find Wild Pirate NPCs are just as fun to play against as other players.

Yeah? 

They’re not pushovers? That would be awesome news. WPE that amounts to decent content is something pve sorely needs.

18 minutes ago, DoubleHelix said:

The difference in the zoning lag duration IS player's problem. Face it. If it was game mechanic issue - we all should have a minute long one, but since some have 5 seconds and others - a minute, well... What are the devs supposed to do - buy the "minute guy" a new PC? Or call a tech to maintain it? People have to take care for their own stuff.

Regarding my "customer" approach - sorry to disappoint you, but the customer is not always right. You as a customer have to move your ass too and that is definitely NOT a customer service issue. The CS is not supposed to wipe your ass. Face it.

You can deny how much you want that the majority of the players are ignorant about core game mechanics, but this is a fact. Players overload their ships, players have no clue how to plan a route considering the wind, players have no clue how wind mechanics work, players have no clue how different types of sails perform etc. and all this is NOT a Customer Service issue too. GrapeShot are selling a game, but providing brain too is NOT among their prerogatives. 

All of this nothing more than attempting to sidestep the very straightforward reality that players do not have control over the fact there is lag when they zone, they have no control over the fact there may be sotd’s firing on them before they have control over their ship on the other side, and your answer to these facts is to talk shit about anyone who doesn’t have your level of hardware or knowledge of software tweaking.

You know what’s a fact? Knowledge of game mechanics has ZERO to do with this issue, yet you keep bringing it up as an excuse to belittle others in an attempt to move the conversation away from the fact you have no real argument and are just here talking shit.

WTF does knowledge of wind have to do with getting hit by by sotd’s during zoning lag?

ZERO

Explain to me how whether a player is Mensa smart or Homer Simpson dumb will impact whether there are randomly sotd’s on the other side of their crossing. You can’t because it doesn’t. Explain to me how changing software profiles will eliminate zoning lag on a rig that is within game specs but not top of the line. You can’t because it won’t. If that rig is within game specs then yes it is a CS issue because getting blown out of the water when you have no control over your ship isn’t quality game design and this is I said your business acumen is lacking:

No the customer isn’t always right but when your game is already failing then saying to your remaining playerbase “LULZ UR RIG SUX GET GUD NOOB” over something you can fix to limit player frustration would be a dipshit move, but apparently it’s the one you would make.

18 minutes ago, rsly75 said:

Sounds like a good idea, but is the AI / NPC enemies fun and worth playing against?  Like I said before I don't have a lot of faith in these developers. I just don't think they have employed any real talent or experienced programmers.  I mean look at all of the animations in the game just for a visual.  each animal has like 3 or 4 animations and that is it. a walk, run, attack, and die. the transitions are bad and janky. I love the idea of the game but I don't think we will ever see a very polished game.  Look at ARK, they still think that that is a polished game and instead of making it amazing they went on to make this one.  It's like they do an okay / half baked game and then move on to the next thing to make a quick buck.  I was hoping to play with other people to make it more fun, but I think the PVE would get boring very quickly and it would end up being a build a base simulator with nothing to defend or fight against and nothing else. 

Yup that’s pretty much what pve is, build and sail with minimal fighting. It’s far from perfect but at this stage it’s what we got. They did at least put sotd’s in squadrons to make pve ship combat more challenging but I’m not gonna tell you there is a sophisticated AI in there making tactical moves in combat.  FYI Ark still has a full time development staff so it’s not like this game is what they made instead of continuing to work on Ark, it’s in addition to. The most likely overlap in staff is people who do things like design the terrain.

The WPE is an idea that might bring more challenge and content to pve, but it’s only just now being rolled out on PTR, so it’s down the road a ways for official servers if at all. Based on your comments I’d have to honestly recommend shelving the game for a year or so and then checking back down the line to see if has been made more suitable to your tastes. Pvp is an uphill struggle for anyone not a part of a larger company and pve lacks combat content.

New fad diet amongst tames. You didn’t hear this from me but ostriches started it as a joke to convince elephants and rhinos they could lose weight only eating C foods. I think bears and pigs got snookered into believing the gag and I’m pretty sure the giraffes and tigers are in on it.

1 hour ago, rsly75 said:

Thanks Vorxius,

I will try it out, but the whole idea was to play with my boys. they worked so hard to build the ship it really took days for my boys and I to build it.  Due to a raid before taking most of our stuff so we had to start again. It was really hard to tell my boys that all of our stuff is gone due to other players coming by and probably with in a few minutes destroying all of our work.  They didn't even get a chance to use the ship. They don't want to waste their time building another ship. it took way to long, and they sink way to fast. Just not worth the time. We are going on to play another game together that doesn't punish us from being off line. So thank Vorxius for your mature response and your sincere care. Sadly there are some fanboys  in this game that don't see the problems with this game and will insult you for not wanting to play it because of the frustrations and waste of time. If they made some really good NPC's that could actually guard your base while you are off line then maybe we will try sometime down the road, but I don't have a lot of faith in these game designers / programmers to have the ability or experience to create the AI to do that.

Honest question: Did you not consider pve game mode if your main objective is to do something fun with your sons? Open world pvp always carries the risk of losing everything, in fact to some degree it’s more or less inevitable. In pve other players cannot damage your ships, tames or buildings so the risk of losing your work is largely mitigated.

You’re never punished for being offline in pve unless you do downright foolhardy things like leave tames in the wild or park your ship in the middle of the ocean. The game does indeed have a myriad of issues, but just based on what you’ve posted so far it sounds like pve would address the source of your frustration.  Overall, I’d respectfully suggest that Early Access games are often poor choices for gaming with kids, whose ability to understand and accept bugs, glitches, imbalance and other issues relating to ongoing development of a game are a lot to ask of young minds still developing and maturing. Having said that, the imbalance between offense and defense in this game’s pvp is currently a major problem, so your own frustration is understandable.

4 hours ago, DoubleHelix said:

99% of the issues experienced are not dev's or game fault. 

*Falls out of his chair laughing at the sheer absurdity of this statement.*

No wait... I can't...I can't breathe...

It's  just so...

so

so freaking WRONG.

Anyone wanna start making a list of issues players have no control over that are directly a function of poor design or coding? And let's just get the counter argument out of the way and say yes, we're all very aware this is an EA game. It's unfinished and their will be issues. But claiming all or nearly all issues experienced are the players fault is patently absurd.

6 hours ago, DoubleHelix said:

Some players jump borders for minute, some in 5 seconds. That should point at first place at hardware. If your PC is loading slowly, maybe you should take a look at this first instead of blaming the devs and asking for mechanics change. E.g. try lower graphic settings, low memory mode - there is a room for tweaking. Another frequently met issue is a computer that needs software maintenance. 

Changing game mechanics because someone is having issues because of obviously non-game design origin I find as absurd.

Apart of this, the inability to escape from SotDs points at game-mechanics ignorance. Since they have max speed of 6 knots and their AI is quite simple, it is a piece of cake to loose them even at same speed. Just wiggle your ship left and right and they will start making wider zig-zags than you as they are programmed to follow your ship. 

Apart from this - receiving some cannonballs IS part of the game. Deal with it. Or go play with Barbies.

Yes, news flash, different people have different pc's and some are better performing than others. While I agree that people should investigate and make appropriate changes to settings to maximize their machine's performance, you and I both know this only does so much to mitigate these sorts of problems. So, if someone is playing on a machine that is within the game's specs but after setting adjustment is still experiencing this issue, you find their complaint absurd. So glad you're not in charge, and your business accumen would not make your game last very long, since this is a customer service issue and your approach is to blame the customer and tell them to spend more on their pc (several hundreds up to thousands of dollars) in order to play your 30 dollar game better. Right.... This is what I find absurd.

Here's what's ignorance: talking about people's inability to escape from SOTD's as if it's a skill based issue when if you had taken the slightest bit of time to actually read AND comprehend the OP, you'd know it's all about a point in the game where all the skill in the world doesn't matter because you have no control over your ship DUE TO ZONING LAG. You're talking about wiggling your ship is nonsense because this is about a moment when you have no control over your ship. Or maybe you know this but are deliberately conflating irrelevant circumstances in order to diminish the complaint by disingenuously equating it with skill issues.

Either way, get real dude. The problem isn't the OP's skill, it's your lack of reading comprehension (or did you even actually read the OP, doing what many posters do and offering a knee jerk reaction off of reading a thread title?) and/or failure of logic in constructing your argument. No one here is arguing they shouldn't get hit with cannonballs, so your suggestion this is what people are complaining about is a strawman argument. The complaint is about getting hit with cannonballs from multiple sotd's you can't evade or fight back against yet because you're still stuck in the act of zoning. 

Does it make you feel superior to talk down to people and dismiss their complaints as childish even when you misunderstand or willfully distort what those complaints are? Instead of telling others to go play with dolls, maybe you should go talk to a therapist.

8 hours ago, Inigo said:

Right, because putting a band-aid on a symptom of a larger problem, doesnt solve the problem, it just makes new ones.

Is the Core issue the Lag? The Zoning? Or the SotDs presence at the border? It's an amalgamation of all 3, and addressing an symptom of 1 aspect doesnt solve any of the problem by any stretch. It's going to create a whole pile of new ones.

No one is arguing that core game design is fine. It obviously needs a lot of work. But do you really think it's going to take much to put in the little bit of code it would take to limit sotd's from targeting players in the meantime while they zone? Also, if you suffer a huge laceration on your arm or leg, do you not want the medics to do anything about it til they get you to a surgeon? Because you know, just putting a bandage on it won't solve the core problem.

Please note that the title of the thread is not “Being attacked by sotd’s after zoning is a core design problem” or “I have a suggestion for how to solve a core design issue.” You’re acting like putting in this simple straightforward fix will somehow make things worse. Can you suggest some way that would be the case?  Can you also make a case for why players should have to deal with this nuisance until some unspecified point in the future when the core game design is reworked to eliminate the need?

Because based on Atlas's history to date, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it probably won't get done by next weekend.

Okay I'm about 90% in agreement with most of what you said with one exception. The thread exists because someone is having a problem with a specific game mechanic. You're advocating that the mechanic shouldn't exist in it's current form at all, which is a much larger issue than just how to deal with the problem the OP posted about. I'm in agreement with your ideas about changing the game on a fundamental level because I think that would be a better direction for the game to go in. But do you see how that's a much larger thing than just "hey I don't wanna die just because of zoning lag and bad luck?" I say make the suggested change of putting a timer on sotd targeting, which won't affect pvp, and let that relatively simple solution suffice until such time as the major rework of the r'aison d etre of sotd's can be accomplished. Fair enough?

43 minutes ago, eeeceee said:

This thread made me into a chucklehead, hehe. I'm not sure if quite have everything right here. The token provides a claim, and within this claim there may (or, may not) be indestructible buildings. Nothing has a timer however, which is the important part. It's possible to place upkeep to extend your claim. The claim is what defines land ownership, otherwise we got cute guest houses.

If I had indestructible buildings, and didn't own a claim, what happens? I need to own a claim to build, or my buildings are not indestructible, and also to get the benefit of the token claim system?

 

I would ultimately refer you to Sulfur because I've never played Wurm so I can't speak to the system with authority, but as he's describing here, and using some experience based common sense, I'm guessing you must have a claim to build structures. In Wurm I don't think the structures are industructible until you get raided once, and then they gain protection for a period of time based on how much you had in your upkeep, which the first raider got a portion of. So I'm guessing you wouldn't be able to own indestructible buildings without a claim. 

What I really like about this system is it's flexibility for the player. The core problem that exists in Atlas which Guybrush's post highlights is the problem of EU solo players or family only companies. They represent a very small fraction of the overall playerbase, but if decay timers aren't set to a length that is otherwise undesirable for the purpose of freeing up unused claims, then these players get the shaft when they go on holiday. This creates a dilemma because it's simultaneously unreasonable to set such a core mechanic around such a small minority AND to expect that minority to have to jump through all sorts of rl hoops not to lose all their time and effort when they just want to take a vacation (having someone come over to your house and log into your game while you're away on vacation just makes you seem weird and is a bit much to expect.) This system rather neatly solves that problem by giving players control over how long they get protection for, but in a balanced risk/reward way.

Now that I've looked at Sulfur's post and thought about it a bit, I do see a problem. I'm guessing Wurm doesn't have pure pve servers or have this system in place on them if it does, because simply allowing players to stuff money into a claim flag to gain ever more decay timer protection could get problematic if there is no raiding. @Sulfurblade can you speak to this? If Wurm doesn't have pure pve areas where this is in place, my suggestion would be to have upkeep costs increase exponentially over time if no company member opens the upkeep box or whatever. Have the progression work so that being away for two weeks is workable if planned in advance, but being away for a month becomes insanely expensive if no one is around.

17 minutes ago, eeeceee said:

Well, that didn't take much time to figure out how to exploit that mechanism. I can't see how making land structures indestructible changes that? Doesn't that just remove the need for a mechanism, really?

 

No because you still need to define land ownership for other purposes like placement, otherwise you get lawless, with some chucklehead buiilding his base as a guesthouse right up against your back door.

19 hours ago, Liatni said:

Not sure if they are allowed to put a micro transaction into EA? Are they? The game is far from a finished one. But, yeah, you got a point, if they simply want to be a Money Grab, add tons of micro transactions in your game, that is the easiest way to money grab people in any game. IMO.

At this point there is not enough of a playerbase that micro’s would generate meaningful revenue. Whales don’t drop thousands into games when there are few players and the game has an uncertain future. Also once they release to Xbox, it’s entirely possible Microsoft would prohibit them from doing so because it just looks awful from an ethics perspective. Don’t know for sure, just speculating.

12 hours ago, eeeceee said:

Anybody from grapeshot play atlas?

They might be, but I’m convinced not nearly enough to grasp the issues that need to be addressed. There have been too many things that are wildly obvious to any regular player which they seem oblivious to or blindsided by.

24 minutes ago, eeeceee said:

3 months raid protection if I get my friends company to raid me?

Can't see a problem with that.

Also, no longer a full loot game?

Nice.

Almost any mechanism you can come up with, someone with enough time, friends and resources can find a way to exploit it. Given that the devs are already supposedly considering making land structures indestructible as a means to shift pvp focus onto the water where it belongs, I don’t see the loophole you bring up being too big of a deal.

On the other hand I think there is much to recommend the idea. Claims have proven to be one of Atlas's thorniest problems to date. If Wurm has developed a solution that works and that solution has been in place long enough to be proven, then there’s no need to reinvent the wheel. The main question would be: Is there any appreciable difference between the two games that would impact whether this approach could work for Atlas?

Off the top of my head I can’t think of anything and that makes me a fan of this suggestion. I think this is something that @Jatheish and company should have a look at if they haven’t already.

1 minute ago, Chucksteak said:

Was hoping youd find the irony

“Define irony. Bunch of idiots dancing on a plane to a song made famous by a band that died in a plane crash.”

Don’t you

forget about me

Don’t 

Don’t

Don’t

Don’t

Don’t you....

Apropos of nothing but 80’s references I always preferred Say Anything with Jon Kusack, because of amazing lines like:

”She gave me a pen. I gave her my heart, and she gave me a pen,”

So if you guys know so much about women, how come you’re at, like, a Gas n Sip on a Friday night with no women anywhere?”

”The world is full of guuuuys. Don’t be a guy. Be a man.”

and

"Well sir, I've given it a lot of thought, and I've decided that I don't wanna buy anything, sell anything, or process anything as a career. I don't wanna buy anything sold or processed, sell anything processed or bought, or process anything bought or sold for a living. I don't wanna repair anything bought, sold or processed. I dunno sir, I haven't got it figured all out yet. Right now I just wanna hang with your daughter."

3 minutes ago, Chucksteak said:

*squints eyes and shakes head at boomer for still replying to this thread*

11 pages, fuck sakes.

I'll take 2 kracken dildos, dont ask why. 

#norealistleftbehind

Oh it’s on me is it? 

11 pages of people replying, the last of which before my last post was 2 hours ago, but it’s on my head?

*sticks his tongue out at Chuck* 

The guy’s post was funny, and I don't care if he said it last year during Kwanza, I’m gonna say so. Realist is gonna do what he’s gonna do, you know that by now, so whether any of us posts here matters little, guy who just posted here to imply others should stop posting here.

1 minute ago, Realist said:

Wtf? Is going on here?

Hard to say. Without more info it’s hard to tell if the loss was because of a bug or the op not understanding decay timers and acting properly. I don’t want to assume either is the case without knowing. Shame either way. If it’s a bug he wouldn’t be the first. If it’s decay timers he’s def not the first but it wouldn’t be entirely out if his hands in that case.