DocHolliday

In other words he's experienced it the hammer.

I am flabbergasted by all the people who expected no wipes in this game.  I thought that was common sense it would happen multiple times.  Everyone I know playing this game expected it.  I look forward to the wipe and I have a job, family, dogs, house, etc.  Those responsibilities are not exclusive to you and those mad about the wipe.  What you all do have in common is ignorance.  

I get that part, just seems people are mixing Anarchy update stuff with post wipe stuff into one big mess of misinformation.  Part of the reason I am posting less on the forums.  Lot of garbage info and people acting like cry babies instead of having intelligent conversations about perceived issues, bugs, etc and possible remediation steps.  

That is not directed at you.  Your response was rational and appreciated.  I should have been clearer in my post.  Not feeling well today and groggy.  

Why are there people who feel its their mission in life to call games dead?  

Has a statement been released explaining every single detail for the new rule sets?  I have not seen it yet.  Just wondering how so many people can talk about specifics.

I support a complete player wipe and since this thread is open to everyone I am posting my support in it. 

I expect there to be and would be surprised if there wasn't.  It seems that many ARK players are bringing their experiences into this game expecting the same things.  I dunno.  Odd dynamic between a player base that says it hates the devs and the company. 

I just expected this to happen.  I am not surprised by it and it does not bother me one bit.  I've tested many games over the years so I am used to it.

I just don't understand the angst. 

Not wiping before release would be a huge issue for new players.  I do not see how they cannot do it.

Was ARK a massive persistent world like Atlas in terms of size and players?  I never played it so no clue and I will not assume just because they did it for one game that means they will do it for the next. 

If they did not wipe for release and I was new I would not want to play the game. 

I am starting to think people should have to answer a questionnaire before participating in EA.  There will probably be multiple wipes before full release and once the game is "released" it will be wiped again. 

Did you guys think they would release the game and force all the new players to compete against companies that have 2 years of infrastructure in place? 

1 hour ago, Talono said:

Fully agree, wipe now if you need to wipe.

While i see no reason for a wipe but some underage teens complaining : „Mom, i find no land to claim ! Wipe the bad men !“

Different rule sets and features will affect a launch for this game differently.  How do they know how that will work without wiping the server and acting like this is a new launch? 

There are a lot of other reason for it as well.  I expect wipes to be a common thing during EA as the game evolves.  Get used to it. 

Reasonable and mature discussion?  Never going to happen. 

Seriously though what Winter said. 

If the market allows purchase orders that can be partially fulfilled we should be good.  I'd love an Eve like market in this game.  Its like real life.  Sure you need 100,000 wood, but the market only has 50,000 to offer.  The system allows them to sell you that 50k and now your order is only requesting another 50k.  The market has what it has at any particular price point.  Now if we have to travel to the market NPC to get a status on these orders that would suck. 

If we're going with real life then everyone in the game needs to die at some point.  No respawns and you cannot purchase another copy of the game.  This line of argument is dumb.  Stop it. 

That stinks I was looking forward to this.  If they have to delay to take care of higher priorities and/or get the market setup right I am all for it. 

What if flags could be integrated into the buildings and required upkeep?  This flag would need to be built and aggressors would need to attack and destroy this structure to take that territory?  The claim area would be increased in size, but more difficult to hold?  I dunno just tossing ideas out that are similar to what we already have, but change the way it currently is. 

No.

This is the first time I have seen a post on it.  If nobody told the devs maybe this is the first time they are hearing of it. 

7 hours ago, DeadbyFrag said:

I don't understand the "we should be able to do everything mentality". What is there to strive for when you can go from level 0 to level 25 on 3 maps and unlock half the game?

I play PvP for the human competition.  I play it to help my team kick the enemy's team rear end.  Skills are neat and all, but they get in the way of the content I want to pursue and thats the human created content.  Missions, SoTD,  FoY, etc are all small aspects of the game to me.  Many people in my company think this way. 

The beauty of these games are the choices.  We choose the content we want to enjoy.  We are given a wide variety to choose form.  I hope they do not make the skill tree a time consuming grindy mess.

At this time the game is alpha.  How do they test skills if they make it takes months to achieve?  We're in alpha.  Make it cheap and easy to get so we use it.  Gives the devs more data points to work from to improve the game. 

I cannot stress the last part enough.  This is an alpha.  Rarely do alphas have a ton of content when they start.  Most games are still adding content through the beta process and these days even after a game goes gold new content is still being added.  A lot of content can be added the next two years and after release. 

Forums are a crappy place to discuss this stuff.  It always devolves into the same messy crap.  I come here for the info and entertainment for the most part and toss some serious ideas out there once in awhile in the off chance the right set of eyes sees it.  :shrug:

On 2/16/2019 at 3:11 PM, Cantore said:

 I'd also be in favor or reducing the size of the lighthouse by around 40% in height and width. I think the model is way too large.

Agreed 100%

You could have just called him a name back and gotten the same effect. 

21 hours ago, Rovalis said:

Lmao this is ridiculous. It's the same jerkwads over and over just pouring over every thread trying to fight off ORP in any way, shape, or form. BULLET FORCE and Itsme and LABATTS and DOCHOLIDAY. Surprise surprise.... If you fools wants Ark mechanics, go play fucking Ark. I'm sick of beating the same dead horse. You guys have nothing to counter the arguments points, you simply just spew off the same nonsense I've heard in Ark for ages. "PVP bro, it's PVP! PVP or gtfo! Omfg you killed me im calling my russian megatribe broz! PVP qqqqqq"

Before you start tossing my name around take a look at my suggestions.  If you expect me to support every single word out of your mouth and wipe your arse then take a hike.

I support ways to mitigate offline raiding.  Naval engagements are a lot of fun and I'd prefer to see more of them so if ships need to be better protected while companies are offline then I support it.  Allowing companies complete and utter ship protection is NOT something I want.  You think mega's are bad now.  Imagine them if they could pump out an endless supply of ships that can be protected.  I shudder to think about it. 

"Oh look we sunk 10 of little Jimmy's brigs and here he is with number 11.  He only sinks 1 ship for every 10 of his lost, but we just can't keep up with those numbers."

300% bonus to anchored ships is a start.  Again look at my drydock suggestion.  The biggest thing is the ships HAVE to stay ingame and take up room, require resources to maintain/protect.  They have to be put somewhere and they all cannot be protected.  Mega's would simply stockpile hundreds of ships and anyone fighting them would simply succumb to the endless onslaught of protected ships even if their company is superior in PvP tactics.  I don't want to see that.  I want to see smaller companies use superior tactics and skill to beat larger companies.  Need to find that balance. 

How do you patch out human behavior?  Many games do this and thats why they suck.  People like me flock to games with no rules, more options, but then human nature destroys it.  The balance here is on the tip of a needle the size of a single atom.   Good luck!

A game I used to play had an interesting mechanic for this.  Open world PvP but destroying buildings was a bit more involved.  I don't know how well this would work for this game.  I like it in Shadowbane, but nervous how much it would change this game.  I cannot predict the outcome.   Just spitballing here to see what people think.

Shadowbane used "Bane stones".  Bane stones cost a decent amount of gold and time to create.  These were used to attack your enemies. 

1. Roll (build) bane stone.

2. Take bane stone to enemy fortress and place bane stone. (If you are killed before you place it then it can be stolen.)

3. Enemy nation is notified of this bane stone placement.

4. Enemy nation has a time period (24-48 hours? don't remember) to pick a time for this bane stone to go live.  Attacking nation is notified when you choose time so they can prep for the coming battle.  The times allowed gave the attacker a preference for the day(s) the battle would happen, but the defender got to pick the time it started.  Example:  We place bane stone on a Wednesday so the fight would happen on the weekend, but defender choose early morning which is good for them, but bad for us...but better then a weekday when everyone is at work. 

5. At selected time bane stone goes live.  All buildings around Tree of Life (spawn point and protector of surrounding buildings) are now susceptible to damage. 

6. Battle does not end until either the Bane Stone is destroyed or the Tree of Life (protects buildings) is destroyed.  Claim flag is the equivalent here.