ATLAS So I thought we could share our Base and Ship designs before the wipe |
- So I thought we could share our Base and Ship designs before the wipe
- Melee combat. it needs fixed!
- Thank You Grapeshot! I hope you stay true to your words and justify them with Actions!
- Worth it?
- Two simple changes.
- Alliance/Coalition Influence Map [03.03.2019] NA PVP
- Ok we all know the bad situation on pvp... this is pve right now
- Ship yards for boat protection
- How to stream this game?
- Adding islands...what to choose?
- So.. How are we supposed to claim raided land?
- Why cant i find where to make the boulders for the catapult?
- Is there trick to finding whales?
- NA PVP Kraken Bowl - Naval Combat Tournament
- Decrease max company size even more! (March Update)
- March Update discussion and alternatives
- A minor change that may help you enforce your limited alliances vision
| So I thought we could share our Base and Ship designs before the wipe Posted: 03 Mar 2019 07:43 AM PST | ||
| Posted: 03 Mar 2019 02:28 AM PST if you have tried using most melee weapons in combat, you know that an enemy can back-pedal and load weapons easily while you swing wildly in even low-lag situations and miss nearly every attack. a few weapons have fast animations, like the pike or sword but the rest are god awful and slow. why can a pike attack faster than fists? why does it take 3 seconds to swing a 2 handed mace, or 5 seconds to use a power-punch attack when all the enemy has to do is move an inch to either side? [link] [comments]  | ||
| Thank You Grapeshot! I hope you stay true to your words and justify them with Actions! Posted: 03 Mar 2019 03:05 AM PST
 | ||
| Posted: 03 Mar 2019 10:16 AM PST So I've been questioning whether or not to buy this game since it has come out. I've played ark pve on official and private boosted servers since it came out and have put thousands of hours into it. Is it worth the buy? [link] [comments]  | ||
| Posted: 03 Mar 2019 08:49 AM PST First let us drydock our boats back onto shipyards, boat unsinkable just kill the dock, would make dock durability useful. Second grappling ammo for ballistas, so you could "tackle" and by that i mean catch boats at sea and maybe board and steal, lower cap time for each attached grapple like 25 min. Would also provide method to tow boats or drag them out of sandbartraps [link] [comments]  | ||
| Alliance/Coalition Influence Map [03.03.2019] NA PVP Posted: 03 Mar 2019 05:32 AM PST
 | ||
| Ok we all know the bad situation on pvp... this is pve right now Posted: 02 Mar 2019 06:30 PM PST
 | ||
| Ship yards for boat protection Posted: 03 Mar 2019 08:17 AM PST The new updates look promising but what I really want is some kind of ship protection. With the new update it sounds like you have to live on someone's island and be at their mercy since you can't attack them outside their 9 hour window and they can attack you anytime. I want to be able to live off a brig or galleon with a group of friends and be able to go on adventures on the sea and actually have a place to put my boat when we log so I know it's going to be there next time I log in. I think some kind of ship yard/boat dock where we can pay gold to safely dock our boat would be a huge step in the right direction to actually making this somewhat a pirate game. Just my thoughts. [link] [comments]  | ||
| Posted: 03 Mar 2019 11:21 AM PST I want to stream this game, I run a pve mixed with pvp server cluster so I figure fuck it I'll stream. My issue is obs is choppy as hell doesn't matter what settings I run this game at it's at 11 fps on obs. My specs are Ryzen 2700x Rtx 2070 32gb of ram Game is on a 120 GB ssd I even stream using my wife's PC as a streaming PC and still runs like shit. I see others run this game just fine on twitch. Anyone else with an amd processor having issues? [link] [comments]  | ||
| Adding islands...what to choose? Posted: 03 Mar 2019 04:45 AM PST Anybody know the type of island you have to add to a cluster, to find silk? Not the names of the islands, but the file names in the grid editor? Or is it the climate that controls what grows on the islands? [link] [comments]  | ||
| So.. How are we supposed to claim raided land? Posted: 02 Mar 2019 04:04 PM PST Let's say you took the time, did your homework, scouted the islands, snuck in a FoB, and have all your members log on to attack during the enemy island's raid window. Let's even go as far as saying you're attacking during a war phase. How the hell do you actually claim the island..? The way flag claiming works now is that you have to basically kill anyone standing in the flag area to claim that small circle claim area. But now... islands only have 1 flag for the whole island. Does this mean we have to completely kill every single member on the island before claiming..? Because if that's the case, I hope the dev team realizes it won't work. People will just hide in a bush somewhere on the massive island. Not to mention that until the "spawn anywhere on the map" thing goes away, they'll just naked spawn to contest. Let's say you have to completely foundation wipe them. This will not only take too long but will encourage players to spam foundations everywhere, thus also reducing server performance. There's a couple of ways it can be done but the one I've seen proposed is a progressive raiding system. If raiding was looked at as more of a progressive goal than something you just run in and claim flag spam, it would encourage players to work on it like, for example, raiding in any other old school mmo like WoW. Here's the idea I'm proposing:
So what would be the benefits of using a raid system like this?:
This is just an idea I'm throwing out, of course. I haven't seen anything from devs on this aspect yet so I assume they're still working on it. Let me know if there's any way to improve upon it. [link] [comments]  | ||
| Why cant i find where to make the boulders for the catapult? Posted: 03 Mar 2019 07:04 AM PST So i have the skill and can make catapults in smithie but i cant see the boulders to craft them. Any ideas why? [link] [comments]  | ||
| Is there trick to finding whales? Posted: 03 Mar 2019 02:16 AM PST I spent 6 hours yesterday looking for whales and could not find a single one which is funny because the first time I ever died in atlas was me punching a whale so I know they are around, it was really deep though. Is there a way to spot them or just hope you go past one and actually get agro. [link] [comments]  | ||
| NA PVP Kraken Bowl - Naval Combat Tournament Posted: 02 Mar 2019 12:57 PM PST Hey sports fans, as announced during the State of Atlas discussion, we will be hosting the Kraken Bowl on Wednesday 3/6/2019 at 9pm EST. This will be for the best of the best ship captains and ships on NA PVP. We will have multiple rounds of ship on ship combat located in the Kraken zone. Based on participation, we will modify the amount of rounds of the tournament. Who can enter you ask? You can. Please post a screenshot of your ship. As it stands, we will have a 3v3 category, 5v5 category, and a free-for-all at the end. You can enter as a solo ship/crew or as an entire team. We will only pick the best ships for the tournament. The FFA will be for anyone who wants to go down fighting before the server wipes. We will be live streaming all of the action live on twitch for those who can't attend. https://www.twitch.tv/digital_trauma https://www.twitch.tv/handsome_stalin Please submit your interest as soon as possible so you have a chance of being the first Kraken Bowl champion of the seas. Ships participating in the FFA simply need to show up in the vicinity at the allotted time. [link] [comments]  | ||
| Decrease max company size even more! (March Update) Posted: 02 Mar 2019 08:05 PM PST
 | ||
| March Update discussion and alternatives Posted: 03 Mar 2019 01:58 AM PST Like everyone, I have opinions and speculations about the proposed changes as well as some ideas for modifications and alternatives which I will present here. I think speculation is appropriate because, while I intend to participate on the PTR, I won't be able to test all my theories and, like exploits, I expect many who do test them will keep the results to themselves if they feel they can use it to their benefit. For context, this is all from the perspective of an NA player on NA-PVP. I'll start with something that's no longer on the list, but still demands commentary: -daily quests with unique and powerful rewards -- Oh Lordy, please no (on the official PvP servers). While I'm very much in favor of the devs' stated goals driving the changes I suspect what's proposed, as-is, will add up to (on official PvP) an experience which delivers much of the worst both PvP and PvE have to offer. First my concerns regarding the proposed changes... By allowing anyone to build anywhere, griefers can come to the island and place foundations to block resource and treasure map spawns and only the settlement owners will be able to do anything about it outside of the vulnerability window. And, even during the window, it would be a non-trivial effort for a non-owner to remove stone foundations. Also, attackers will use an alt account with a disposable character -- it doesn't take too many levels to be able to construct stone -- to build structures which will act as a FOB for use in a future war declaration. This will lead to the paranoia you see in EVE Online where, despite the increased upkeep, settlement owners will just KOS anyone they haven't cleared anyway. There doesn't appear there will be a way to prevent AI defenses from firing on non-alliance settlers you're friendly with. On the flip side, enemies can abuse the transition from invulnerability to vulnerability by slipping past defenses just before they become active, hiding in a blind spot with explosive barrels etc. waiting for their target to become vulnerable. I also don't see disallowing mortars and the like to all but the settlement owners as being practicable. As above, attackers will abuse the period of invulnerability just before the transition to gain an advantageous position with their ships and land forces. Even when they don't, what is a defender supposed to do? Blockaded into a harbor with nothing but puckles (and cannon bears?) to fight a naval bombardment... The plan to incentivize allowing smaller groups and individuals to live on a settlement by lowering the upkeep is easily abused. INT crafting characters, dedicated tamers, and probably more can easily be split off from the main company with only some inconvenience. These characters could build small structures on every island held by an alliance and the incentive to make room for real strangers to generate a tax break is quickly negated. And it's the largest companies and alliances who will have the most capacity to engage in this abuse. It was stated in the livestream (but not in the Log) that settlement owners can demo any structure on their island. An insider/hacked account/someone bored or pissed off can not only screw over their own company but every company on the settlement. When it comes to war declarations, it seems the "significant cost" of the token is intended to weigh heavily in the decision. I've yet to play a game where economics have been an effective limiting factor for large organized groups. In EVE Online, when the developers released the first Titans they said they expected the tremendous cost would mean there would be only a handful in the entire universe at any time. There were dozens within a few months and many hundreds within a year. Players hadn't been working on construction on that scale simply because, prior to Titans, there was no reason to. In Atlas, I boggle at how much gold we left on the ground because we couldn't be troubled to take it all home. If the cost of a token is raised to a level where the large alliances must truly weigh it as a consideration it'll be cost-prohibitive for anyone smaller. Which circles us back to alliances and de facto alliances. If there's benefit to doing it, players will just work around system-imposed limitations. Four companies per alliance and two alliances: players will just daisy chain their alliances to stitch together larger conglomerates. Alliances will try to set up puppet governments to get around the claim limitation. An island will be owned by company ABC but everyone knows alliance XYZ will drop the hammer on them if they attack because ABC, despite not being a member of XYZ, is just a puppet government. Player-run stores and upkeep are, however, wild cards. Perhaps large alliances won't feel compelled to gobble up everything they can because they desire access to all the variety of resources. Lastly, it's my understanding allowing players to set any non-golden age as a home server or respawn where they died will only be a short-term implementation to avoid congestion at game re-launch. That's fine, but should not be an ongoing capability. A discussion of alternatives... While the existing claim system has some serious flaws and issues with offline attacks, it's also been hella fun. I prefer naval combat, but repelling an enemy trying to establish a beachhead was the most enjoyable part of ground combat for me. Aside from the fun, it's authentic; it's how the real world works. I propose we retain some of the existing system blended with new ideas. Divide each island into pre-defined square parcels (no more issues with overlapping and allows parcels to be named via their own grid reference). Parcels are fought over in much the same way claims were previously. An island becomes a settlement only when a company holds 60%(?) of its parcels. A change of ownership of a parcel does not change ownership of any structures built upon it, but does start a 1 day(?) timer before demolish is allowed after which a new 7 day(?) timer starts. If the structure isn't demolished in this period, the builder retains ownership and demolish rights for parcel holder are revoked. I also believe 24/7 PvP is the way to go. And, yes, despite having once been wiped by a "box" alliance I still believe this. However, we keep the new per-island vulnerability window, but rather than being invulnerable outside this window we instead provide mechanics to mitigate what damage may be accomplished during off-hours. Claim rules for parcels differ depending on whether it's within or outside the vulnerability window. Outside the window there will be an island-wide (not per-company) limit on the number of claims which may be contested at a time. There will be a multiplier applied to the time required to claim so they take much longer, and the person claiming must remain within the parcel being claimed or the timer stalls and eventually resets. A claim in progress cannot be abandoned by placing another flag. More broadly, I previously proposed mechanics for establishing a beachhead (https://www.playatlas.com/index.php?/forums/topic/38115-creating-beachhead-mechanics/ ) which I'm still fond of but would require some modification under the new system. When it comes down to it, unless the settlement owners can restrict the capacity of individuals or companies whom they don't fully trust to do them harm, they simply won't be tolerated at all (even if there is plenty of room to accommodate them). At the same time, they want those whom they trust to have the tools to defend themselves. Settlement owners could allow or disallow residents to place mortars and other structures on an island-wide or per-parcel basis. They should also be able to restrict some residents from building stone structures. Additionally, akin to the proposed auto-repair structure on PvE, create two new structures for PvP, one for buildings only and one for harbors. During periods outside the vulnerability window both structures provide a damage resistance buff for buildings and any damage taken is automatically repaired using resources taken from the inventory of the auto-repair structure. The harbor structure affects anchored ships as well as buildings and additionally provides a burn duration debuff. There also needs to be some intelligence to the system such that an attacker can't continue to drain the resources by shooting at a single piece of structure repeatedly. There is a global limit per company on how many of each type may be built, and perhaps settlement owners receive a bonus allotment based on the number and tier of islands they hold. Additionally, to prevent alt-abuse, there may need to be a minimum company size and activity level needed to qualify for the first structure. So, rather than full vulnerability during off hours enemies could still impose economic damage but be limited in their ability to do significant harm to ships and infrastructure in properly-designed and defended locations. A beachhead may be established, but owners won't wake up to half their island gone. Most certainly ongoing adjustments to tools like explosive barrels will fold into this. It would require some additional thought, but perhaps these structures could be used to provide an alternative to the server-choking responses (such as building garages) players have resorted to address the threats they face. For example, there could be an additional component to the buff, which is active all the time, which is inversely proportional to the number of qualifying ships/structures within a given range (greater than the buff effect range to prevent strategic placement allowing the benefits of both a garage and the enhanced buff). Also, the structure could be configured to create a Company Log entry (which in turn would allow for email alerts) based on some meaningful metric, such as some defined number of resources being consumed within a defined period of time. Which circles us back to alliances. As I said, I don't believe hard-coded limits on alliance size will amount to a hill of beans. That said, I do think limiting companies to a single alliance will help fragment the community (which is kind of a goal). At the same time, we need to come up with the incentives and disincentives necessary to make people bring their affiliations (ally [defined by the alliance if in an alliance or a list created by the company if not], non-aggression, everyone else) into the open via a formalized system. As an example of incentives, the above auto-repair structures could confer their benefits to ally ships and structures. Defensive emplacements could be set on a per-gun basis to fire or not upon non-aggression targets allowing, for example, traders to pull up to a designated pier while restricting their access to more sensitive areas. As another example, under the new rules companies will have a finite number of claim flags. What if claiming an island were to "consume" a number of flags equal to the island's tier? Now what if joining an alliance of a certain size were to provide a discount to the cost of claiming a tier 3 island but also a proportionally larger penalty to claiming a tier 1 island? The larger the alliance (a measure of activity would also have to come into play to prevent "stuffing" with inactive accounts), the greater the discount and penalty. The larger alliances are going to covet tier 3 anyway, so why not encourage this while making space on tier 1 islands for others? I've got ideas for implementing disincentives which I'll not post here because, if used, they would be most effective if their implementation was not apparent to all. :p Anyway, food for thought... [link] [comments]  | ||
| A minor change that may help you enforce your limited alliances vision Posted: 03 Mar 2019 12:30 AM PST I think developers have acknowledged that giant alliances/zergs have been unhealthy for this game. The question now is enforceability. How to enforce that solution? There are many things you can do to prevent people from bypassing these limits by setting up "friendly red" allies. One of the minor changes that you can make, is that, in an island that's experiencing war time or raid window, spyglasses will not show you the company tag of players UNLESS they are members of your company or member of your alliance. That way, it will make it harder for those people who will try to bypass the limits to distinguish between "enemy red" and "friendly red". The same should apply to tames. This minor change may help you enforce alliance limits in ground pvp. There may be additional solutions for naval pvp, but they may not be needed until we see people try to cheese the alliance system or not. [link] [comments]  |
![Alliance/Coalition Influence Map [03.03.2019] NA PVP](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/98VXxh3L49ishZbo4mfDtmd5b5a9C1cGG15LfTCQP-Y.jpg "Alliance/Coalition Influence Map [03.03.2019] NA PVP")
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/wz72gqe8pwj21.png){kind=link}
![[link]](https://i.redd.it/nrs4uqcwetj21.jpg){kind=link}
| You are subscribed to email updates from r/PlayAtlas is a fan community for Atlas, the giant MMO pirate game from Grapeshot Games!. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment