Bullet Force

Ok so using that logic we'll end up with a game where everyone uses one kind of melee weapon, one kind of ranged weapon, 1 ship type and so forth. Sounds like great fun..

This has just been added to the notes for the upcoming patch. I understand that the devs want to try and stop people building these silly ship designs with masses of stacked cannons but 30% seems like quite a lot given that large cannons weigh a lot more, cost a lot more and the ammo is also more expensive. Perhaps an increased reload time would be a better option.

Well my guess would be that players could potentially sell the same resources for less then the NPCs and therefore make a profit.

You can sail a galleon through a large gate just fine. It's a tight fit but it definitely goes through.

Does this mean that I will be able to run the game on High and not be at a disadvantage vs those that choose to use Minecraft graphics? If this is the case then the developers deserve a round of applause for their efforts. This has been an issue affecting not just Atlas but also ARK for ages now.

The game needs some serious new content. 5 ships, 3 types of fire arm and 3 melee weapons doesn't cut it. Players need variety and more choices. I'd like to suggest the following: Flagship A new ship type - larger then a galleon or alternatively the same size as a galleon with some visual changes One per company A large powerful and extremely expensive ship that has an aura around it that benefits friendly ships nearby Would have 2 types of aura that the flagship captain could activate. The first would be an offensive aura that would increase the damage of cannons on nearby ships and a defensive aura that would reduce the damage taken. Only one type could be activated at a time. Cannons: Do away with this medium and large cannon concept. instead rate cannons by size and caliber. Real life cannons in that era ranged from 6 pounders up to 42 pounders. Suggested sizes: 6pdr, 8pdr, 12pdr, 18pdr, 24pdr, 32pdr, 36pdr, 42pdr (taken from wikipedia) Add the size with a barrel length system. Short, medium and long. The end result would be 8 cannon sizes with 3 lengths per size = 24 possible variations. Larger cannons would do more damage, but reload slower. Cannons with a longer barrel would have more range and velocity at the expense of increased weight. These different cannon sizes would be balanced by the fact that the larger cannons would weigh significantly more, the ammo would cost and weigh more. The barrel length would affect how much room it takes up on the ship as well as weight. Ships: Add variations to ships. For instance you would have a base class ie Galleon, Sloop so on and then under that you would have a bunch of variations of that class to choose from each giving unique bonus/disadvantages. Examples: Transport variation. Increases the base weight of a ship but makes it weaker. Ie for the Galleon which comes with an extra 10k base weight but at the expense of all planks only having 50% hp. Speed variation. Increases the base speed but significantly reduces carrying capacity and moderately reduces plank health. Tank variation. Increases the base plank health but significantly reduces speed. Handling variation. Increases the turning speed of a ship but reduces speed. Damage variation. Increases the damage of cannons but significantly reduces plank health. Range variation. Increases cannon range but all cannons fire much slower. Ship Balance: The weigh distribution on a ship should affect its handling with more even weighted ships having far better handling to designs which place a lot of concentrated weight in one part of the ship. Sails/Masts: Separate the sail from the mast. Sails could now be torn from cannon balls without actually hitting/damaging the mast itself. Damaged sails could be replaced in combat with some manual effort and time required. Figureheads: Provide a small stat bonus to the ship it is affixed to depending on the type Ie Weight Figurehead gives a small weight bonus, speed figurehead grants speed so on. The bonuses would be no more then say 5-10%. Would allow for further customization of ships. Weapons: Variations for weapons + guns: Reload faster, do more damage, are more accurate, have more durability, swing faster. These changes on the whole wouldn't require on the whole much work dev wise but would provide real and meaningful changes to PVP that would spice up the gameplay by quite a large amount.

While its a good change in many ways its also a bit of an odd change. There is now effectively no reason to place normal planks if you can place gun ports instead which come with many benefits and no drawbacks.

Destroy the shipyard.

Duffy its pretty obvious to everyone here that you are either in this 'ChemB' company or closely related to them. Trying to big note yourself on a forum, making it out like this ChemB company is somehow gods gift to PVP is rather hilarious.

The gather rates need to be equalized in terms of weekday to weekend rates. They both should be the same, both set at the current weekend rates. This would promote more PVP and combat since players can get into the fight quicker and recover from losses faster. As well it would have the net effect of encouraging more aggressive play and wars since players would be able to afford and risk more then they can do currently.

The numbers are always going to drop especially in a very hyped game that has had so many launch issues and recurrent problems. That said there is currently very little content in the game to keep players playing. I play PVP so there is at least PVP to keep things interesting but even then there is a lot of limitations and lack of variety in strategies and designs.

The item dropping is indeed a problem and has been as well in ARK. The solution to this in my opinion is that the attacking team should be declare a battle or siege 'area' in which any dropped items remain for say an hour or two. This would at least give the attackers time to breach the walls and obtain some loot. That said the main reasons for offline raiding are simply timezones and strategic. I'm from Australia and when I raid a base on a NA sever there is a good chance those in it maybe offline depending on what time I attack. There is also the strategic factor, especially if you are in a smaller crew it makes no sense to attack when the enemy is at its strongest.

That wouldn't be bad. Personally though I would prefer instead of these vague levels they instead come in various sizes from the weakest ones being sloops all the way up to a mighty galleon at the highest levels.

So the counter to something that is obviously broken to everyone that plays the game is to just have more of it then the opponent? That's some excellent logic right there.

He raises some good points about damage to NPCs, K mode (in my opinion it should be removed entirely from PVP), horse & swivel combo and unrealism in ship design and the game in general. However he fails to mention the issue of unrealistic gliders oddly enough (I guess that because hes probably quite fond of using them) which is strange given the narrative he is pushing about unrealism in the game. These all valid issues however I think the bigger issue isn't just realism its content. There is only effectively 3 ship types and 2 cannon types. If you ask me that is pretty pathetic for a game that was produced with all the groundwork already done for it. They've had 3 years worth of solid ARK development under their feet and all they could turn out is 5 ship types (1 one of them is a raft, another is a tiny boat - both aren't really combat capable), a couple weapons, some cut and paste islands and 2 cannon types?

Do you have an opinion yourself on this matter or are just going to promote some random streamer? In that video he states that "currently melee is more effective then guns". Its hard to take him seriously with such an inaccurate statement.

Use a mace and when they all come out of the ground do the mace slam attack. This will kill all of them except for the warrior. Repeatedly use slam to kill him.

Yep this needs to go and to be honest I am very surprised it has not been addressed already. This horse and swivel nonsense has been a thing now for several weeks and widely condemned on this forum and yet still somehow the devs are oblivious to it. It makes you wonder just what are the devs doing. Too busy adding pointless cosmetic crap no doubt.....

I feel that the gather rates seem a bit off/low considering how long it takes to even make a basic schooner. If you ask me weekday rates should be the same as weekend. Allowing people to build ships a bit faster will improve PVP since players will be more willing to risk their ships knowing its not going to take them a week to recover.

This could be solved if the devs added some real physics and a balance factor to the ships. Putting a lot of weight on one side of the ship should through off the balance and therefore the handling. In any case none of this is helped by the fact that there is so little variety to choose from in ship design atm. You have basically 4 types of ship to choose from, 1 of which isn't even really capable of being a warship so that leaves 3. So you have 3 ship types and only 2 types of cannon. That isn't a lot of room to be creative.

Yep there is real point to melee atm. Its terrible vs even wild animals let alone against other players. It is all risk and no reward, you take huge damage and do fk all damage. Completly pointless, plus the whole animation thing combined with lag makes it rather difficult to use.

They are the same devs that made ARK so its hardly surprising. ARK had the same issues, a lot of an unexplained missing blueprints for ages until the devs finally worked out that they were missing.

You have to realize you are playing on international servers. What is "night time" for you most likely isn't for many other players. You cannot demand the game be tailored specifically for a few players.

Melee is useless in every application. Even against wild animals its rather shit, low damage, high risk, high chance of dieing. It's always better to use a firearm. The game gives you these fancy moves which look and sound great on paper but when applied in PVP are completly worthless. For instance the charge up attack where you stand still in a ball for about 5 seconds before unleashing some giant slam with your mace has no use in PVP at all. If the enemy sees you doing that he simply runs away, this even applies to normal melee attacks. The enemy can just run away and because of the slow animations you can never really hit them. Yep pretty much. No skill required and extremely boring for gameplay.

I think there needs to be a hard cap on the amount alliances a company can have. I'm in a top 10 company atm and I'm noticing that out of the top 10 Companies' List we are allied with 5 of the top 10 companies, which in rough terms would equal several hundred players and a large chunk of the map. In addition to this we are also allied with many beta companies that have up to 50 or so active players in them. Now there is nothing wrong with having allies but the way I see it, the top 10 companies should be fighting each other more often. I'm an ARK player and I recall that in ARK a similar situation developed among the largest mega tribes. They basically had an informal agreement among each other not attack one another because there was basically nothing to gain by doing so. They had all the resources they needed and all the blueprints and the best breeding lines and so forth. The end result was that PVP became quite un-competitive and rather stale. A somewhat similar situation has developed in Atlas which I think is a bit of a shame. The other side effect of this is that if you are in a smaller tribe you are basically screwed because everyone is allied with everyone. I would suggest an Alliance cap based on player numbers rather then company amount to keep things fair. Ie a group of small companies could all still ally up because their combined total players would be less then the cap.