| Hats off to those hosting unofficial Posted: 21 Mar 2019 10:58 AM PDT Your efforts do not go unnoticed. God knows you have your work cut out for you. Keep fighting the good fight and maybe one day it wont be so bad. submitted by /u/slindner1985 [link] [comments] |
| flair Posted: 21 Mar 2019 05:38 AM PDT |
| Console release Posted: 21 Mar 2019 11:35 AM PDT I looked online and couldn't find anything about this, so figured I'd ask here. Me and all my friends play on Xbox and we're really excited for this game since we all really like Ark. I know when Atlas came out on pc they said it would come to Xbox "in 2019", but I was wondering if there has been any update since then? submitted by /u/WhiteMoss_ [link] [comments] |
| A New Claim System for All? Posted: 21 Mar 2019 05:11 AM PDT First, I'll recognize that bits and pieces of this suggestion may have been suggested before. Props to the all the suggestions before mine. Not meant to be a perfect suggestion , but maybe some parts are good. BLUF: Claim flags become spheres of influence that can increase or decrease based on the activity of the controlling player or company. Functional Components: Hard cap of 1 flag per player; Initial placement of flag provides minimum size zone of control to player. eg. 5 square radius; The area over which the player can influence increases when the player pays to increase it: a) payment made at the claim flag. b) payment will be an assortment of basic mats increasing in amount for each increase level. The area over which the player influences decreases when: a) the upkeep costs are not paid. Upkeep costs will be an assortment of basic mats and gold, payable either directly into the flag or from a tax bank. b) the claim flag is destroyed. "X" dmg = reduction in "x" area lvl, until completely destroyed. The claim flag owner collects taxes for resources collect in their sphere of influence. collected resources are held in the claim flag "booty chest" Declaiming your own territory, the player will lose all control of structures built in that territory. If structures are, or become encompassed by another sphere of influence they will be taken over by the new claim owner after "x" period of time. Companies: When a mbr joins a company the players area in included in the company area of influence however remains under control of the player. The player can choose to allow building etc. in their area of influence. company taxes apply to all company areas. The company gets a cut of what is collected on a single players land. (Every player is the lord of their own area) All company members can pay into any claim flag to increase the area of influence. Allows claim area management to direct growth in selected areas. When a player leaves or is booted from the company, the claimed are remains with the player. The company would have to destroy the removed player's flag and have their own area of influence cover it to gain control. Conflict and Game Play Build rules per area of influence as per the owners setting. Foundations do not block you building in your own area. overlapping areas of influence: a) anyone can build. b) taxes collected are split evenly between the controlling players c) decay timer applies; d) structures are always attackable. Players outside a company can place their claim flags inside the company area of influence. The new claim will have a minimum period of invulnerability (48 hrs), after which the flag and structures can be attacked and destroyed. (the initial claim size it again 5square radius). ** yes, this can be used as an exploit to potentially surround and screw around with player claims. The trade off is that players only have one flag and will need to declaim their territory to use their flag in this manner. Raid Times and War: Each player controls the window of vulnerability for their own area. If you are part of the company, you are subject to the company's war declaration Some Recognized Exploits: "Each player can control their window of vulnerability separately" This will allow companies to shift resources etc from one area to the next to avoid raiding and can effectively prevent the good stuff from ever being vulnerable. This cannot be stopped by this design. The cost of doing this will be the players' time and use of the limited claim flags to enable this invulnerability scheduling. Even if this occurs, the remaining parts of the base will be able to be destroyed and eventually everything could be brought down. The question lies in "what's more important, amount of territory controlled, or protection of the goods in one smaller area?" Players using and placing their claim close to yours to mess with your resources and build area. Your minimum control area can never be affected by other areas of influence so your base core cannot be messed with. yes it will cause an annoyance and the overlap will be a contested area with free build and tax sharing, but it can be overpowered and or destroyed after the initial invulnerability window. And if someone wants to "waste" their claim flag to do this, than they are losing out else where. Yes mega companies could force their players to use their claim flags in this manner, but how long would ppl want to play this way? its a risk... Overall: Individuals have more control and flexibility over claims they put down, vulnerability hours & taxes, even IF they are forced into joining a large company; Larger Company size will enable the rapid control of more land, but at increased cost to maintain. Hard flag limit will require more strategy for placement and management submitted by /u/Slyguysuperfly [link] [comments] |
| Can any Server Admin using external databases help? Posted: 20 Mar 2019 09:56 PM PDT Right I've been pulling my hair out over this issue. My servers all fire up but when trying to cross to another zone/ grid it just hangs and then you cannot rejoin as it gives the travelling to another server rejoin latter kick message, my question is all my ports are open so what else causes this every post I've seen it has been down to ports not being open but mine report open from a remote checker so I'm stuck as to what is causing it. T.I.A Smoke submitted by /u/smokedog77 [link] [comments] |
| Meanwhile in Atlas... Posted: 20 Mar 2019 05:55 PM PDT |
| Atlas players - who we are Posted: 20 Mar 2019 12:49 PM PDT |
| Idea: Make bar shot viable and simultaneously boats possible to commandeer. Posted: 20 Mar 2019 02:16 PM PDT Yes, I know--there are plenty more important things happening. But let's mix it up a little bit to pass the time. I think people get a kick talking about stuff like this. There have been quite a few posts about ship battles and how it's a "sink above all else" META, mostly because it's impossible/impractical to steal boats. This is where my shower thought of the day comes into play. General outcome: - Bar shot becomes a viable go-to ship combat tactic.
- Make it possible to "disable" ships, which makes it significantly easier to steal them.
Change suggestions: - Bar shot range should be increased and/or be possible to fire from large cannons. Its effectiveness against sails should be as great if not greater than large cannon balls.
- A ship with all masts destroyed becomes "disabled," which makes capturing it significantly faster than normal. I'm talking minutes and not hours (exact numbers would need tuning).
- A mast destroyed by bar shot adds an extended debuff preventing mast replacement (similar to planks). If the last mast of a ship is taken out by bar shot, this debuff is further extended.
- Any "popcorned" loot on a disabled ship has an extended spoil timer, scuttling option is deactivated.
Exact numbers/mechanics would need tuning but the idea is to make ship stealing a viable tactic, versus always sinking them. It could add some interesting play styles to ship combat. Even if bar shot range/damage remained unchanged, I think some iteration of the other suggestions could make the risk of using bar shot (getting up close) worthwhile. What do you guys think? submitted by /u/Yakarue [link] [comments] |
| v24? Posted: 20 Mar 2019 05:01 PM PDT |
| A Study in Failure Posted: 21 Mar 2019 07:14 AM PDT I just want to thank Grapeshot for doing pretty much -everything- wrong. From how they handled the launch, to these hair-brained changes they are continuing to make. I truly enjoyed the game for the few months I played and as Jat had said prior to launch, I believe the core concept behind this game did have the potential to be the 'GOAT'. Unfortunately this game is dead, aside from the few hundred maybe two thousand hardcore who will continue after the wipe. I say thank you to Grapeshot because I feel as a participant in the pre-launch hype, launch- and subsequent rapid changes prior to the wipe announcement, I have learned a ton about what a business should -NOT- do and I will take these lessons forward with me in my career! I hope the individuals responsible for this failure also learn lessons they can take with them moving forward in their careers. Good luck to all the gluttons for punishment who continue to be used as test subjects. Before the whiners come in saying 'early access' lets remember EA is usually another term for paid -BETA- not Alpha state, which this game was clearly in on launch. Core concepts, systems and mechanics should be fairly solid (and usually are) before a company charges for early (beta) access. This game was not ready although I will say Grapeshot did an amazing effort rolling out fixes and patches especially during the holiday launch. Unfortunately it just was not enough to keep the majority of players interested. submitted by /u/Scrappyonconan [link] [comments] |
| Does this work with Steam games?! Posted: 20 Mar 2019 06:19 PM PDT |
| My view on the 25x25 PVPVE map theory Posted: 20 Mar 2019 06:18 PM PDT  | Earlier today someone posted a thread with an idea of a 25x25 PVEVP server that spiked my interest in trying to make a usable solution with this concept. This will allow Grapeshot to limit company sizes in certain areas but not break up "Megas" and make them unable to play with the rest of the player base. You can find the original thread here: https://www.reddit.com/r/playatlas/comments/b3eglv/why_not_this/ IDK why the grid lines didn't save. I know I'm not good at photo editing. I also probably said we or I in the same sentence. This is also the best map i could make up, i tried a few different patterns before this and it is by far the best one for a sense of player size vs resources and territory. however size is completely open to change or be reorganized. this is just my POV of the post made earlier. Yellow = "PVE" zone. These grids would have 2-4 Islands per grid, limited resources, basic mats (Fiber, Metal, Thatch, Wood)+ 2 additional not basic mats(Softwood and Wetwood). This would allow PVE players to make Fine quality items. The center of the PVE Zone can host the core PVE content, the Kraken(M13 for this 25x25 example). This "PVE" zone has a 72 or 96 hour demo timer on player built structures. This timer will be refreshed whenever a player of "x" company comes within render of their structures. A 24 hour NON REFRESH-ABLE timer is applied to all player built shipyards that are not BP'd (basic 100% common shipyard you get from the skill tree). Any Bp'd shipyard will have the standard rules for player built stuctures.(this will fix any issues of mass produced shipyards after 3 days and people unable to build new ships to leave ports while still giving PVE based companies the ability to make upgraded shipyards once they are established. This area could also host Freeport-esq areas such as pre-built structures and areas for PVE vendors.(Cosmetics for sure, mats vendor will not be here.) There is no Claim Flag system in PVE designated zones. They will work similar to the current live "Lawless" system. There will be a limitation to prevent what players call "Spam" so it doesn't become an abundant issue. The current system we are working to implement is a bit confusing but it will work something like this: when a player places a structure that structure has a render radius around it preventing another company to build too close to them. When this render radius count gets too high it will be marked as spam and have a 1 hour demo timer. This will be a very high number to prevent from any large builds from triggering this. I realize this is not a perfect solution and will be closely monitoring numbers and checking in game to see if everything is displaying correctly. Naval and player PVP are disabled in these zones. Green= Small tribes or "Colonies" These grids will have 2-3 islands per grid and will implement much of the ATLAS 1.5 features including the new Island based claim system, War declaration, 9 hour PVP windows,and Company Player caps. If you own land in one of the grids marked "Colonies" your company can not have more than 50 people. If you have over 50 people in your Company you will not be able to claim an island in a Colony grid. Also, you will not be able to claim land in the "Empires" unless you declaim all territory owned in Colonies. The goal of this is to prevent "Mega Companies"(anyone over 50 people) from claiming land in the Colony areas. This will also work the opposite way. Colony Grids will host the same 2 types of resources that the PVE zones produce in addition to 2 more types of resources. This will give Colony grids the ability to make Masterwork Blueprinted items without leaving the Colony assigned Grids. Anchored ships will be affected by the island owners pvp time frame regardless of whether or not you own the island. this will stop enemy ships from anchoring to stay alive while friendly ships are free to kill. This will also make the islands residents (non owners) to be involved in the PVP war time frames. If you are anchored outside of the PVP window or War time, your ships will not take any player or ship damage. If you are un-anchored, free reign naval PVP. The owner of the island will have 24 hours to freely demo a newly built structure after a Island Colonist(non island owners but live there) has built said structure. After this 24 hour window the owner will have to physically break it with whatever means they choose. (barrels, cannons etc...) Naval PVP is 24/7 in Colony and Empire Zones Red= "Empires"(please give this a different name) These grids will have 1-3 islands per grid to reduce lag and increase stability. Empires will be close to traditional ATLAS with some very important differences. Company cap will be set to 250, The timer on War declaration is reduced 50%. Wartime will be flip flopped from Colonies, Open pvp is a 15 hour window and Safety is 9 hours. This is island based PVP only. This will make it much harder to protect and maintain your island. Coming with much more responsibility comes with benefits, these territories will contain every resource available in the game allowing for crafting Mythical blueprinted items. Resources will not be congested however and you will still have to travel to get certain kinds similar to how current live is. Island Owners will have the same rights as Colony island owners. Island ship rules will be the same as in Colonies. Naval PVP is 24/7 in Colony and Empire Zones. You can not own land in the Colony grids until you forfeit your land in Empire grids and have less than 51 people in your company. This is just my view on this particular theory. Let me know what you guys think and what you would change.
[link] [comments] |  |
| So they just released V24! :O Posted: 20 Mar 2019 05:16 PM PDT |
| just another opinion on how to improve the game. Posted: 20 Mar 2019 01:03 PM PDT To improve the game and hopefully bring back some of the players a couple of things have to be done in my oppinion: 1) Have one pvp server format. Having 2 seperate ones is just unnesecary and unwated by the vast majority of players. Dont split your already declining playerbase. 2) Let the main mode have the new claim system, but allow pvp action 24/7 (dont want to be farming on some island/doing a treasure map, get attacked and be unable to defend myself). People dont dislike pvping, they dislike their shit beeing destroyed at 5am which will now be impossible, dont make players invulnerable outside of freeports ever, its dumb. 3) Dynamic resource allocation for servers. Since its likely that these raid windows will create big hotspots its absolutely necessary for the servers to be able to better handle large amounts of players. If they dont improve on this most pvp will be unbearable and just out right unenjoyable. 4) Make raiding worth it somehow. If you kill a ship or raid someones base, especially with these new changes, youre never gonna get any loot cuz it will be popcorned/moved to another island which you cant attack. You would only attack someone for the sake of annoying them/pissing them off. Idk how they can do this exactly but there has to be some sort of reward for sinking a ship or successfully raiding a base. Just my 2 cents. submitted by /u/banaandude [link] [comments] |
| May I Present To You .... JATLLIE Posted: 20 Mar 2019 08:07 PM PDT |
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/1ld6ni1xidn21.jpg){kind=link}
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/s4ztt6922en21.jpg){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment