Search the Community

When I transferred my bear to a single boat, the bear flew down quickly. I couldn't find it in the sea. After a while, the bear died. What should I do? Can anyone help me?

C'mon, guys - wilds shouldn't count as crew. Right now, if a wild seagull or wild parrot lands on your deck, it counts as crew and your ship starts sinking if you're already at your limit. Or suddenly extra crewmembers cannot bed in to help in a fight or with whaling or getting discovery points because their places are filled with some random derelict bird alighting on your ship. I suggest two corrections: • disallow wilds counting as 'crew' ( <if wild then crew = false>) • and fwiw, make any wilds count as zero weight until tamed. That would prevent people from trying to kite heavyweight wilds onto your ship to sink it. Might be more of a PvP issue, if it's one at all. Although as Lotus has posted somewhere already, PvE-ers are not above using malicious exploits if it suits their purposes.

With all of the recent changes to the weight of armor and gimping of flame arrows, I feel that all characters should be privy to a free character respec. Now, my character is severely gimped and I am only half XP until next level and no respec available? This is not my doing it was yours, we should be entitled to a free repsec.

The smithy needs more inventory space. You can't create a mythical, legendary, or materwork shipyard in the current smithy. We had the blue prints and the mats to create it, we just didn't have enough space on the smithy to make it... So please either reduce the cost of materials, or add more inventory space in the smithy. That being said, it would be a cool thing to see that or just have resources pull out directly from a resource chest near by to do crafting.

To some people , they use those large gates to wall up theirs base and make sure nothing get inside , but the same excuse they will use when they walled up the entire coast and make a large portion of island unreachable , including metal nodes and rare resources , it is also a pain to load when there are so many of them in the area . I don't see why you need so many gates , in PVE at least , cus i build a secured pen without the use of those pesky gate that block everyone path . I believe there should be a limit of how many large gate you can build in one area .

Unoccupied and anchored ships should be immune to damage...these ships are not currently pvp'ing so why should they be subjected to griefers? The game encourages others to leave their homelands to sail to other islands for adventure, resource, and experience but doing so always leaves you stranded on an exotic island since as soon as you finally make the ship and sail to another island, your ship is immediately destroyed by random griefers. destroying or trying to steal an unoccupied and anchored ship is NOT pvp'ing it is called griefing and because of griefing, Atlas will be absolutely ruined. How about making safe harbors on all islands where you can safely moor your ships for gold coins? These could be NPC ran harbors and ships moored there would be flagged as immune as long as their fees are aptly paid in full.

Whatchu guys think of ships stacking cannons as close as possible on their ships to hit a more condensed point on an enemy ship? I like it and hate it at the same time. On one side, I can destroy an entire enemy side with a couple well placed volleys. On the flip side, there isn't much room for counterplay. TBH, I think Devs are going to nerf this meta and promote intuitive counter play so instead of the whole "whoever has more cannons on one side, wins" its going to be a meta of whoever has the better crew/captain. Which I think it should be. I mean I love seeing about 100 green numbers pop up on screen, but I'll always take a better crew wins meta over that. It'd make the game more fun anyways

When you turn your sails around and they are getting full wind the raft should back up. At current there is no way to back up when stuck up against a pier, you turn the mast around and it shows the way its blowing the raft should be moving backwards. SO you get stuck and you cant move

Should 'Dragon/Cyclopse/Fire Elemental' Tames Be in This Game? I feel like the dragons are ruining this game, currently we're fighting with mega companies and they're farming up multiple.. about 3-5 dragons per day.. yes we can kill them but the games not about ship combat anymore, its about fighting dragons and the ships are useless against them even with dragon defenses. I quit ark because it became all about 'who has the craziest tames' now that's what this is becoming and it sucks because it had a lot of potential to be an awesome ship combat game, why ruin it with giant game breaking tames, isn't ship combat pvp enough??

The wood and stone cliff platforms currently have the same crafting requirements: Surely this should be different? Wood should have less metal and stone and more wood and thatch, and the stone one vice versa.

If you guys intend to push the game towards sea battle, allowing someone to lose a ship because their NPCs were killed almost instantaneously by a ramshackle flame sloop is beyond me. Maybe it is just me, but after losing a mythical brig I spent a very long time on to make to a ship that can be made in 10 minutes is astounding. The fact flames can kill NPCs off your sails and leave you a sitting duck no matter how well prepared you mighta been is a detriment to sea battles. Also, the fact you cant replace sails properly mid combat needs to be fixed. Not only was I left a sitting duck due to the flame sloop, I couldnt even replace my sails even tho I had 5 EXTRA ones with me. In reality, no matter how well prepared you are, or how skilled, the current mechanics/game design negates all of it. I worked since release to make that ship, had 45 extra fine planks, 5 sails, steering wheel. I had a brig within a brig and it meant literally nothing due to design. I hope this reaches someones ideas and they see how silly this is

So I may be a new player but I have been keeping tabs on atlas since the start but as it is, the claim system has been abused from the get go with the devs thinking of many ways to adjust it so it caters for the majority (or powerful, depending perspective) What I propose is keep the unlimited flag system, keep it so no one else can build inside the claimed flag, you can also have unlimited flags but each time you place a flag, the upkeep off the next one will cost twice and the third one triple and so on, or balance it out for both pvp and pve so claim spam isn't too much of an issue. and mega rich tribes can maybe effectively manage as many flags as the tax box ? (I dont know the name as i am not in game currently) will hold and then the devs can tweak the taxbox to balance it out to there liking. The problem I foresee now is we are just going to have lawless zones all over the map as others have suggested which actually promotes the very thing your trying to restrict.

Did you know that you can ATTACH A TORCH TO a SADDLE? Do that with your bear saddle and enjoy the torch floating above your bear's back: Oh... and here is my CREW controlling SMALL HANDLING SAIL placed in front of my Schooner. I hope he feels comfortable down there: The thing I hate in Galley in Atlas - amount of masts. I mean seriously. Bigger ship DOESN'T mean more MASTS! There are more complicated sails, more yards, etc, but in most cases THERE ARE JUST 3 MASTS (i know there were ships with even more than Galleys have here but those were just an exceptions). Check the Pirates of the Caribbean. Even biggest royal ship with 2 rows of gunports have 3 masts: There was a pirate game Corsairs before. The BIGEST WARSHIP in a game had just 3 masts: And what we have here?

The company log currently only reports successful territory claims or losses; it does NOT report territory thefts in progress. In our experience, an attempted theft of one of our territories always goes something like this: 1. A splash message appears on screen for a few second "Someone is stealing your territory at xx.xx, xx.xx!" Five seconds later, the message is gone. 2. We ask in company chat, "Did anyone get those coordinates?" If yes, we create a map marker with the coordinates and investigate (because there's no other in-game way to see map coordinates at a glance, and because the challenged territory is not marked as such on the in-game map). If no, then we run around holding "H" while looking for a yellow ring... The company log MUST show ALL claim activity, successful or otherwise.

Having an end game 'raid' happen every month regardless of character level is beyond dumb. Tie this fountain of youth mechanic to your character level and not a real time clock. Lvl 35 and I am 90yrs old? All because I do not play every day for eight hours for the last month to get to max level? (Yes I know it is actually a naked sloop spam (re)run, lets pretend they will actually make it the real end game raid it should be)

So I think there is increasingly a need for a conversation to be had amongst gamers, not just for Atlas, but across gaming, about Early Access. And @#$% it, since Atlas is the most high profile EA out there right now and (most importantly) it's the one I'm playing, there's no time like now, and no place like here to have it. I think the conversation that gamers need to have, and need to communicate clearly to the game development industry, is what are our minimum expectations for a game going into Early Access? I have been through several Early Access experiences now, and two things strike me equally about the process with regards to players. 1) Many players do not understand, accept, or make allowances for the EA process as compared to a finished game. These players do not have proper expectations, which leads very predictably to anger when their expectations do not remotely match reality. 2) Many players who fully expect the EA process to be a bumpy one exhibit a tendency to dismiss any and all complaints coming from others with the catchall "It's EA." Both of these things are problematic. The first one has been covered ad naseum in other discussions, but the second I want to examine more closely, because any reasonable person examining the landscape of gaming today can see that EA has not been purely a win for gamers, with all shinning light and rosy outlooks. EA to date has it's good points and it's bad, but there is a clear need here, and that is the need to create some definition of what is minimally acceptable as a level of game development BEFORE entering the EA process. There is a simple reason for this. Beta testers are either paid or far more often unpaid, but they don't pay to be beta testers. The difference between beta testers and EA players is that the latter have paid to be there. This means they have a right to expect a minimally playable product, even if it is one still being developed. The truth of this is shown in the fact steam is currently offering refunds for Atlas for many players beyond their usual standard of 2 hours, primarily because those players could not reasonably have been deemed to be offered a playable game. Given that charging players to be beta testers works very much to a game developers advantage, while paying for a game in a not playable state is very much not to the players advantage, we should not reasonably expect developers to self impose limitations upon minimum thresholds before pushing a title to EA. Personally, I believe one of the core initial mistakes made here with Atlas has been pushing to EA too quickly, and I strongly suspect the likely reason for doing so was to get Atlas onto the market during the peak consumer spending month of December. From a revenue generation standpoint, this makes a lot of sense, even if from a development standpoint it would have been better to wait another 3 or 6 months or whatever. I think that the record level of refunds and negative reviews that GrapesCard™ is facing because of this decision right now is good for players and good for the industry, because it is demonstrating to all developers that there can be very real negative consequences for pushing your game to EA too early. But let's stop and think about this for a moment as gamers. Do we really want our only option to hold game developers accountable for the product they offer as EA to be refunding and negative reviewing after the fact? Would it not save time, money and energy for ALL parties concerned, players, developers, and heck even Steam itself, if there were clear expectations of minimum levels of development in place coming from players, since after all, we are the final arbiters of the products worth? To give a clearer understanding of what I'm talking about, I'll use two specific examples from Atlas of where I think game development was an obvious failure and "it's EA" is not an acceptable excuse. 1. The extreme level of creature overspawning. C'mon Wildshot™, are you really gonna say with a straight face that after 3 plus years of developing Ark, that you didn't have any better idea than this of what constitutes appropriate levels of creature spawns in your game world? Really? Yes it's EA, yes we understand things will need to be tweaked, but we did actually pay money for this, and if you can't come up with a better default out of the gate than what you have, with Ark's development as a baseline to work from, that's just piss poor. Try again. 2. The land claim debacle. This is especially egregious for anyone familiar with the ongoing saga of pillar spam on Ark official pve servers. How in the name of Keith Richard's beard could you not have come up with a better approach than what we have after having that experience to learn from? Saying "it's EA" just doesn't cut it here, because you've had a directly correlational issue from your other game from which to learn and improve upon. The troubling thing is this one thing more than any other suggests you're not learning from experience, and that's a dangerous thing for a development studio to have as a flaw. Now that I've laid out the conversation as I see it, I'd like to ask those posting to do two things please: 1. Refrain from using non helpful pejorative labels such as white knight, fanboy, hater, kid, etc when discussing this. These labels do little but provide an excuse to dismiss those you disagree with without having to actually address any points they may be making. They do not move a conversation forward, and this conversation, I believe strongly, we all have a stake in. 2. Try to avoid having the conversation get lost in the morass of details or sidetracked. This is not a thread to debate the land claim system or creature spawns or other specific aspects, but to talk about what sort of expectations we should set as players for developers. I know this was a long post, thank you for taking the time to read it, and thanks to all that contribute constructively in advance.

With the changes to stone, some may not want to build with it anymore. They should offer an extra respec so we can use those points elsewhere.

I've carved out a beautiful little spot that holds all of my shipyards, has GREAT resources, no threats from the fauna, and easy access to a FoY. Sure I'd LOVE to make a claim on my own spot, but why? What's the benefit?

Ok so I spent all the time building my Brigande crewing it out from the gold I got from floatsom and a treasure map or two. I was ready to set sail and take my revenge on the high seas against ghost ships. I killed 3. The most gold one dropped I think was like 14. Um what? This to me is a problem. I know they drop blue prints but I think they should drop a lot more gold or I won't be able to afford to maintain my AI crew. Hope this gets addressed. Love the game and it's potential but this is an area I think needs some attention. More reward vs risk. You can lose your ship and all your crew in these battles after all. Treasure maps you just lose possible your life and your gear at the time.

Under the current system, when a claim flag expires it becomes claimable by another company. if the claim flag were to instead expire and disappear, if not renewed, this would let others see that there is a space and claim it themselves. While this does give companies the ability to more easily take over an island slowly, it also helps smaller companies find claims on lands not inhabited by large companies. It would also clean up much of the ocean, as well as get all unused claims back into circulation sooner, as they are easier to find.

This is not saying wolves should not attack players or tamed animals on sight, just not other wild animals. Have it so wolves will attack and eat other wild animals only when their hunger level is below 2/3 The issue is on certain islands where there are not many spawns capable of killing a wolf wolves will hunt and kill all other animals until all the animals are rolled as wolves so that the island is full of wolf packs and not much else. This would go a long way to solving that issue

The rock here looks very odd. I am also hearing trickling water. Was this area intended to be a river or waterfall with pond? Looks and sounds the same after restarting game. Second image shows location.

As per the subject, I feel that Common quality blueprints should be craftable w/o the skill requirement. By all means, restrict Fine and above to specialists in the trade but in a game with restricted skill points, having common prints openly craftable allows players a little more freedom to be independent.

The cow is a pain to move without the ability to ride it. I'd like to make stalls and have a cow in each stall, but how do I get each cow into its stall? As I write this, I just remembered there is a , (comma) key to direct animals to a spot. I will try that, but I still think we should be able to ride the cow same as the sheep

When fighting battles on the high seas with the ships of the damned, it would be cool if instead of just sinking your ship, warriors of the damned boarded your ship if things weren't going your way. This could offer a secondary battle and last ditch way of saving your ship if you can fend them off. I, of course, would also like to board a ship of the damned, but one thing at a time.