Tr4ckz

What people appreciated is that you could gather thatch now in any (!) way and had a better means of transportation. Most people who you claim to appreciate especially tames, don't give a sh*t if it's an elephant, a cart pulled by an npc person or a flying saucer helping them farm. I personally disapprove of the tame focus and would wish for much more of a crew use or any other means for that matter, that don't give you the feeling you play ark 2.0 but a immersive pirate game.

Because you can be quite certain that the whole "delay to add content" message is just a marketing way of saying that they need more time for the formerly planned content - it just sounds better. I don't mind the delay of the "major" content update (underwater biome), don't get me wrong, rather have it properly bugfixed before deployment and postpone it for that matter, but I agree that the QOL features like bookshelves and other minor items which shouldn't be connected to the rest of the planned implementations, to be released separately.

Plus there are whistle control groups just like in Ark, so whistling only a select predefined group. IDK about ATLAS videos explaining it, but there should be plenty of ARK videos on that subject and the system / controls are identical as far as I know.

/signed

Which server are you looking for? EU / NA | PVE / PVP?

Why the hell are you so damn salty all the time? It's exhausting to read... Apart from your phrasing I agree on this point. I like the general idea behind the claim system, having a stronger company leasing out the land to smaller company for small taxes and offering protection or whatever in return. That this system doesn't work so well currently has quite a few reasons, in the opinions of the topic owner and me (and I presume a few others), fast travel is among these reasons. This one though... IDK what to say to people like you. ATLAS is not specifically a game for mega companies. With this you are basically saying, join a large company or go play single player. This is neither how this game was advertised, nor how it should be, but a complex world experience, housing the most different playstyles and company sizes in it, having each their place and potentially benefitting each other (e.g. taxation system as an attempt to achieve that). You are basically saying "sod off"... Ah screw it, you are just a salty troll, who is unable to read or comprehend 90% of an argument, picks one line he can actually say something in return and keeps juggling his balls while ignoring the rest. Done discussing with someone like that.

All I can say is it worked back then, though I specifically emphasized that my info is several weeks old. How about not calling BS about everything first, but consider changes have been made instead? That would help a discussion much more that borderline insulting everyone else. Back to topic: so the point of "instantly" spawning in seems to be fixed then (apologies for outdated info). I presume a "trickle" will still work though, which still makes it possible in some manners to jump around on the map and not predictable army movements. Your point about the farming bases is that typical view from a position of power. Most small companies don't have the resources to just try conquer something, as you have a 50:50 chance it is actually someone's proper base or part of an alliance willing to defend it. And if you start out and don't have land to settle, loosing even a schooner hurts way too much to risk it. And you get the notification as soon as someone tries to claim it. Even if that goes through, the 50:50 chance remainsthat you will be killed again (having nothing to defend as you start out) and it's all gone the next day. So again you are missing the point: it's not about being able to being lucky to snatch something from someone, for a few people that might work. It's about land being artifically scarce because there are useless. mostly unused bases all over which can only be kept alive because people can fast travel. Try to stick to the issue please

Busy the last days, so here my belated reply to that: As stated my actual (!) experience is from early January and numbers between 20 to 30 people. Of course we haven't pop them all in, within 30 sec, but a manner of minutes. ANd of course you don't do that on a single bed. We had two schooners leveled on accomodations only with a dozen or more beds on it, just for that purpose. About the FOY example of yours I can either only imagine that you had but one or two beds (CD on beds go up if someone spawns in them, no matter if same player or additional personal PVP timer), so that might be an explanation. Otherwise there might be a limitation regarding server cap, which was constantly exceeded on the first day of FOY introduction and respective zones. I'm not really gonna get into the haggeling afterwards between you guys in this post about the details, but the essence of my post remains: removing fast travel would benefit the game experience a lot and reduce problems of "empty" lands. And the situation which some posters have stated as an advantage of the fast travel, having "farming bases" all over, is exactly part of what I consider a problem. Why should you have farming bases which you jump in between and long distances, if you don't actually live there most of the time but go there twice a week in total for an hour or two in total? In my current "small tribe" situation (sorry for the ARK term), we have 80% of the needed resources on our island and for the missing other 20% we need to go on specific farming runs over 1 to 2 grids and fill up our cargo ship, go allied islands which have the needed resources, farm there and come back once a week. And that's imho how it should be... No empty base duplication, cause you can artifically jump over there.

I don't know where you getting that from, but at least in early January it was safely possible to have 20 to 30 people transfer in half an hour to a single grid. So whatever "hard limit" you are talking about, I've never encountered that. Meanwhile the rest of your post is more or less completely obscurring the topic and missing the point. What most people are saying who are advocating a fast travel removal is that a feature like this renders having a large world with space in between and a territory concept useless, as it makes it possible to move your "army" anywhere around the globe in an instant. All these features you claim to be supported like alliances and politics... you are actually irradicating them like this. We are in defensive alliances with all our neighbouring islands right now. Being 20 people online and allied doesn't help though, if you are being attacked by someone who can have a whole army drop in with a single message... And the reality is that most larger land claims are held by major companies, specifically NOT welcoming smaller companies for taxation and so on. We've only encountered that on "smaller" more diverse company grids. And all I've experienced from top10 tribes so far was either disregard towards small companies or seeing them as prey. Politics only happened between the "big guys" in my corner of the world right now and not in a manor that smaller companies are welcomed as tax payers or subjects if you will. All supported by the current fast travel system to close the argument.

Not getting into the claiming system discussion here (which I by the way like in it's targeted concept), though it's a topic of it's own. Removing fast travel / limit spawn options per zone would indeed though reduce a lot problems caused by mega companies, so I disagree: I've played in both a company of 80 to 100 active people at launch and then since a few weeks with 5 friends as a small company because I wanted a change. As a mega company all we did was claim as many islands as possible in different grids, not even necessarily connected. If we got raided --> 30 ppl spawn in beds next to gear boxes - no smaller company stands a chance. Same for raiding. In the beginning we were still sailing pirate style, fully geared with 10 people per ship through 4 zones waiting to arrive at the raid. Later on, more or less one guy sailed a boat with 30 boxes full of gear there and at 9pm everyone spawned in, dropping their treasure hunts or farming mats runs on the other end of the Atlas map and annihilated some poor sod after fast travelling and gear equipping again). From the perspective of a small company and from the game experience that I would personally want for this game, I have to say: THIS IS NOT FAIR nor the way it should be. This shouldnt be CS GO where you log in for 10 min of annihilating someone's base, weeks worth of farming, simply because you can, or better said your 100 buddies can, because you gain an unfair advantage over ppl without the numbers. As of now you (devs) didn't create a system where the amount of land equals the amount of force you need to have to "colonize it" and defend it, but where having the bigger stick - even by an inch - means you can have everything and the rest of the playerbase scraps. My solution / suggestion: In the other thread about this topic, it was proposed (as mentioned above) to remove fast travel, limit it to spawning to the same zone (no matter if ship or land bed) AND a "home" bed / zone of your choosing if you die in your current zone without anymore beds (cause they get destroyed or whatever). This would mean you actually need to travel (sail!) over grids to get somewhere - this is an exploration game with combat, not CS or PUBG, so for 10 min drop in action go play something else. This would mean you can't respawn on the next ship of your mega company in the adjacent 20 zones when yours got sunk but "home" - which is imo how it should be. This would solve overblown landclaims and help reduce "empty" territory claims. Large companies still will have their several or even dozen islands, but need to spread out their memberbase over them to govern and defend them, as well considering attacks more wisely, as you might leave your many claims undefended and can't just jump back and forth with all your available members. [Edited for typos]

Here my feedback to each with comment on: quality of interaction / function i use it for Bear: well implemented / fiber Chicken: well implemented / eggs Cow: well implemented / milk Bull: no use atm... not enough thatch, can't carry enough, no cargo Crow: taming horrible (circling makes bola throws a nightmare) / post tame use good - crafting skill Elephant: taming horribly (hit / feed spots too small) - wood gathering is fine though stamina so low.... Giant Pig: well implemented / poop (maybe add seed gathering?) Giraffe: well implemented / carry & transport Horse: used it once in early, not mus use after Monkey: well implemented / health regen and poop machine gun Ostrich: well implemented / travel mount Parrot: taming horrible (circling makes bola throws a nightmare) / post tame use not given, buff too small to matter Rabbit: no use (dection neither works nor is useful atm, not like parasaur in ark) Rhino: taming horribly (hit / feed spots too small), doesnt gather metal properly (no other animal does either?), stamina low, other uses are fine / stone + flint Sheep: well implemented / wool shearing Tiger: well implemented / meat + leather