boomervoncannon

Innovative approach, but it does limit you to building in water if you need to build around the raft and that in turn could limit other things like farming or housing tames. Still, way to be creative, I like it!

You’re that guy who showed up the first week of building the Empire State Building and complained that windows weren’t gonna open, aren’t you? Not saying the issue isn’t real or your complaint isn’t valid, just that it’s an 18 months into EA and we’re polishing towards launch kinda thing and right now there are just much more fundamental things to address that should take greater priority.

If it doesn’t have a respawn point, is it really a base?

I love this mechanic btw.

optional.

#snakesrpirates2?

Built a stone base for the first time. Still working on it but the basic structure is there already. It's nothing fancy but it houses our storage and crafting stations. It's up against a tall spire with a flat top, and our dream goal is to build up to that top, and put some sort of base up there as well. The grind to this point has been a little brutal and has crossed servers both official and unofficial, with more than one or two start overs, but this feels like it might finally be going somewhere. Here's to the possibilities.

I don’t have to admit any such thing. I won’t deny that it’s possible, only repeat what I’ve already said, that to assume one is a result of the other would be just that, an assumption without compelling evidence. Coincidences happen all the time. It would be TOO coincidental if it happened over and over again. Then one would have a pattern, and that would be a more compelling argument, but even then it wouldn’t be certainty. For a period of about 20 years, when the NFC team won the Super Bowl, the stock market was bullish the following year, meaning overall it went up. During that period, when the AFC team won the Super Bowl, the stock market was bearish, or overall went down for the year. That’s a 20 year pattern, would seem to be pretty strong evidence of causation, based on the approach your taking. Yet I don’t know anyone who takes seriously the notion that which team wins the Super Bowl has any impact whatsoever on the stock market, do you? Correlation is not causation. I will say that if the devs are adjusting their game based on streamer desires, then I’d consider that a foolish path indeed, and sadly if it were the case, it wouldn’t really surprise me. Disappoint yes, surprise, no.

I did it. Give me a year's supply of Cheetos and Olivia Munn or they'll stay that way. Your call. These are my demands and they are non negotiable. You know how to reach me.

I remember my first rodeo. The lights, the sounds, the smells. Lula Mae Ginblossom swaying gently in my arms. Wait.... that might be my first school dance. Rodeo is the one with the girls or the bulls?

chanting EA like it's some sort of mantra does not even begin to excuse a basic communication problem. If you say 40 minutes and you patch in 20, that has zero to do with the fact it's EA and everything to do with the fact you're being careless with your playerbases time and energy and enthusiasm for the game. Stop trying to wave a magic wand like it excuses everything. If I took a dump in your living room right now, could I look at you and say "EA" and it would be alright? Whether it is EA or not, if you say we're patching in 40 minutes, then patching in 20 is a careless and preventable screwup. Period.

There will be magic. It hasn't been implemented yet. And if you're aware that it's a fantasy game, you should be aware of the back story. The players are descendants of a race magic based fallen kingdom, so making them different races wouldn't fit into that very well. There are tons and tons of pure fantasy games and MMO's out there. If this mix of pirate with a dash of fantasy doesn't have enough fantasy for you, there are plenty of other options. Please don't campaign to make this game something it isn't intended to be.

That's just crazy talk.

Did you bychance swim back across the border to see if your ship had perchance simply failed to transit with you? Most likely what happened is you were victim of a bug, but that would be/have been a good step to check if you did.

ocean water is salt water and afaik not usable for crops. This was something that wasn't distinguished or addressed in Ark, but has been in Atlas. Now a rudimentary desalinization device using evaporation wouldn't be out of the question to make freshwater out of rainwater, but such a thing isn't in the game and may never be.

As a consumer who spends my money with them or does not, I'm entirely comfortable passing judgement on their business practices. I don't think saying they have already addressed 90% of the complaints is anywhere close to accurate when you have people here creating threads bringing up any number of other issues, but be that as it may, since you referenced lootboxes and micro transactions, I think it's entirely appropriate and healthy that gamers as a community should discuss, debate, and weigh the merits of such practices. If we collectively simply meekly submit to whatever practices the industry prefers, then what we will inevitably get is a host of gamer unfriendly, developer friendly profit maximizing practices with dubious benefit to the user. *cough* lootboxes *cough*

There's a very legitimate debate to be had here. Arguing the merits of the issue moves the discussion forward. Labeling parties pejoratively does not. It's dismissive and unproductive. Please stick to arguing the merits.

So given that the source you cited points strongly to how EA is a useful mechanism for indie developers to fund projects that might otherwise not be viable, and I agree wholeheartedly that this is a huge upside of the EA model that often gets overlooked by gamers, isn't it valid to question whether it is appropriate for a developer such as GrapeCard™, sitting on a rather large pile of cash generated from the runaway success of Ark, should be using the EA model at all?

Your premise seems to be that an EA game requires no internal testing to patch. On the basis of the hard earned cash I did in fact plunk down for the game (Early Access, not Internal Testing), I would contend that some minimal level of internal testing should not only be required, but is prudent on the part of the developer. I agree completely that many people expect a fully polished game and do not come with realistic expectations as to what Early Access is. This does not excuse having no internal testing mechanism whatsoever imo because I did in fact pay for a game. I understood the game would not be polished, but I do not accept the premise that means the developers can simply use live servers to test whatever notions they have using the playerbase as their guinea pigs. Furthermore I would argue that the strong negative reaction of the gaming community and the overwhelmingly negative nature of the coverage of Atlas's launch suggests strongly that most of the gaming community feels similarly and thus it would be in Wildshot's™ own best interest (or any other game developer considering an EA phase) in terms of limiting negative reviews, press, word of mouth and even refunds to implement at least some internal testing. Let me throw in one additional argument. Atlas is in EA yes, but this same group (spare me the semantics of claiming GrapeCard™ is somehow wholly different from ARk's development team) released not only an Extinction DLC that was by any objective measure, unfinished, but then also proceeded to release patches to that DLC which created horrible game breaking bugs. This is the same behavior we are seeing with Atlas, only it was exhibited a few short months ago in a game that could not hide behind the excuse of Early Access. I think that's a compelling argument that this development team doesn't take a responsible or reasonable approach to testing, and if you support that position, then I respectfully disagree.

Okay, now I understand your question. I have no idea but I'm curious to see what your experiment reveals. Let us know.

So you're asking can a land based npc manning a land based turret be paid out of a ship borne pay box?

Try having a game full of pirates with nothing to plunder and tell me how that works out for ya. You need trade to plunder my larcenous friend.

They can also be set to do repairs on the ship. In theory they are supposed to pay themselves out of the designated box you can build out of the captaincy tree, but not just out of any box.

This is one of those things Ark veterans could have told you from the get go. It’s useful to have a good knowledge on which tools max which mats when harvesting. Example pick gives more meat while hatchet gives more hide.

I hid them in the bushes at Olivia Munn’s house. If you ever want to see them again, bring a years supply of Cheetos, 4 whole fried chickens and a Coke to her guest house. These are my demands. They are non negotiable.