Flyer Nerf v2 will be good or even worst, Jen reaction on Steam

[iAmE]

17 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

ive never given you my personal opinion on the matter, im just saying its wrong to draw conclusions already when usually it takes time for these things to come into effect? where did i ever give my personal opinion? ill handle the 'corresponding sources' below

Every time you try to dismiss or interpret the evidence in a way that the evidence disagrees with (IE most of your posts recently), are backed with no evidence, or data, what so ever. Thus, they are your opinion, and as has been shown with logic, highly biased. 

I have a choice. Believe the data, or believe what you say. I'll choose the former.

17 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

no you will not, but thats exactly what happened here. we didnt go around on the servers and inform people there is a vote going, only people on this forum and maybe other forums knew it was going on, and who come to these forums? people who have something to say and mostly thats complain. the people who are fine with the changes are most likely playing the game. 

That also isn't the majority of the evidence. You don't disregard data because it is from biased people. All data is biased until it is taken into account with a large number of conflicting bias'. You don't understand data, nor it's collection, and these arguments you're making show that. 

17 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

and you can try to look down upon me with your comments about flat earth but i wont bite, im not that childish  i respect your opinion and i politely try to explain why a small ammount of data gathered by a small % of players is uncredible. i will only ever believe a poll when its from WC and from a source where you cannot tamper with the results.

I'm not looking down at you, I'm trying to tell you that the points you are making are foolish, and fly in the face of accepted science and statistical study. You don't disregard data because you think it's biased. You collect more data that verifies it, or refutes it. In this case, all existing data verifies the conclusions of the poll as reasonably  representative of the community.

 

It isn't childish to point out that someone is being childish. You are sticking your head in the ground and attempting to find any tactful way to say that the data doesn't say what it says. You are wrong, but don't want to admit it, instead, turning it around and saying "No you're wrong", and then throwing some spiel about "uncredible" evidence. 

17 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

i will have to try it with all the fliers available and i will let you know

I mean. I literally have already tried, and have told you so, but yeah, go for it. 

[Captnmorgan]

24 minutes ago, DeningWei said:

Technically they are still saying that they don't intend to wipe, that they will prefer to do a mix of removing depopulated severs and adding new servers instead.

They made this clear at the conference.

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1024229/-ARK-Survival-Evolved-Lessons

56:52 time stamp.

they are leaning towards adding new servers.  But then they will continue to evaluate the situation. And make a decision when it gets closer to launch.

so yeah it's not clear its not a full yes or no. It's a grey area. They may decide to wipe they may not.  You may watch the video all you want no clear answer.

 

im not going to argue the what ifs and this isn't the thread for it. 

[BobRoss]

22 minutes ago, iAmE said:

Every time you try to dismiss or interpret the evidence in a way that the evidence disagrees with (IE most of your posts recently), are backed with no evidence, or data, what so ever. Thus, they are your opinion, and as has been shown with logic, highly biased. 

I have a choice. Believe the data, or believe what you say. I'll choose the former.

That also isn't the majority of the evidence. You don't disregard data because it is from biased people. All data is biased until it is taken into account with a large number of conflicting bias'. You don't understand data, nor it's collection, and these arguments you're making show that. 

I'm not looking down at you, I'm trying to tell you that the points you are making are foolish, and fly in the face of accepted science and statistical study. You don't disregard data because you think it's biased. You collect more data that verifies it, or refutes it. In this case, all existing data verifies the conclusions of the poll as reasonably  representative of the community.

 

It isn't childish to point out that someone is being childish. You are sticking your head in the ground and attempting to find any tactful way to say that the data doesn't say what it says. You are wrong, but don't want to admit it, instead, turning it around and saying "No you're wrong", and then throwing some spiel about "uncredible" evidence. 

I mean. I literally have already tried, and have told you so, but yeah, go for it. 

the only interpretation of data i did was the steamcharts. thats all. and my opinion about it is that there is insufficient data to form a conclusion and i opt to wait a couple more days and then form a conclusion because we will have MORE DATA. about the other sources, mainly being the poll i have only one thing to say and that is that it would be a mistake to take these as the truth, and that i will only agree with a poll that speaks for the majority of the community and cannot be tampered with. isnt that pure logic?

and you keep making assumptions that arent true, you say im disregarding data but i have told you the exact oposite time and time again, i have said WC needs to look at these polls and threads and then take action to get a REAL general opinion from the community. just because i find these sources to be unreliable doesnt mean i think they should be forgotten. 

and i find it rather foolish to consider a poll that only has 700 votes as a source when we are talking about the opinion of a couple 100000 people. especially when this poll can be cheated and people can vote multiple times. 

i am not trying to change what the poll sais, im only saying that it should be taken into consideration that its only a poll taken by a small ammount of people without actually involving the whole community in it. 

you seem to think i'm some kind of statistical illiterate but just because english is not my native language doesnt mean i dont know how graphical interpretation works and that i dont know what public opinion is compared to the voice of an angry mob

 

[Volcano637]

37 minutes ago, Rickyh24 said:

Am I understanding this right? Every point i put into speed on my Tap will now be given back to me and I can't put any points into speed?

You are correct

[Shaggyplattapus]

Since Ark is mostly controlled by Checking Boxes or moving sliders why couldn't they just do a flyer movement speed check box? I don't play offical but I do know how much some people put into a dedicated server......Everything else is pretty customizable why can't flyer movement speed be the same way?

[iAmE]

1 minute ago, BobRoss said:

the only interpretation of data i did was the steamcharts. thats all. and my opinion about it is that there is insufficient data to form a conclusion and i opt to wait a couple more days and then form a conclusion because we will have MORE DATA. about the other sources, mainly being the poll i have only one thing to say and that is that it would be a mistake to take these as the truth, and that i will only agree with a poll that speaks for the majority of the community and cannot be tampered with. isnt that pure logic?

No, the poll is data, and you are trying to dismiss it as "Uncredible" despite the fact that it is, backed up, by third party objective data, in a reasonable way. That is your interpretation, opinion, and it has no founding or backing beyond being your opinion. 

1 minute ago, BobRoss said:

and you keep making assumptions that arent true, you say im disregarding data but i have told you the exact oposite time and time again, i have said WC needs to look at these polls and threads and then take action to get a REAL general opinion about the community. just because i find these sources to be unreliable doesnt mean i think they should be forgotten. 

But you're following me around in threads asserting that my data isn't credible and that people shouldn't take polls as an accurate representation of a community, particularly when community data corresponds with the findings of the poll?

I mean, like I said, you can have your personal opinion that the polls aren't credible, but following me around saying that my data isn't credible because it's a poll is a little different. 

1 minute ago, BobRoss said:

and i find it rather foolish to consider a poll that only has 700 votes as a source when we are talking about the opinion of a couple 100000 people. especially when this poll can be cheated and people can vote multiple times. 

A group of 700 votes can be representative of a community of 100k to a pretty strong degree, and next, there is no evidence that people have cheated in a statistically significant amount because the objective data still supports the outcome of the poll.

1 minute ago, BobRoss said:

i am not trying to change what the poll sais, im only saying that it should be taken into consideration that its only a poll taken by a small ammount of people without actually involving the whole community in it. 

and that, apparently, the only people that participated in it were "Mad people" and it's "Biased" and "Non-credible". 

1 minute ago, BobRoss said:

you seem to think i'm some kind of statistical illiterate but just because english is not my native language doesnt mean i dont know how graphical interpretation works and that i dont know what public opinion is compared to the voice of an angry mob

English isn't my native language either, and I don't think you're statistically illiterate because you don't seem to understand how data is gathered, or statistics are formed. You can be great at interpreting data, I wouldn't know because we haven't even gotten to cover that, but from what we have covered, you don't know how to weigh statistics and feedback across multiple platforms from a diverse group. You don't know that a poll is relevant, even if it's biased, and you don't even seem to know that all data is, inherently biased when taken in a piecemeal fashion. 

You likely have some degree of knowledge about statistics in a general sense, likely in a business background, so you are basically the end user of the statistical data, and struggle to understand what goes into compiling the statistics that you get to look at in nice graphs and tables. 

The ending issue is this; all statistics are biased, all data is biased. It is gathering the data and plotting/recognizing trends that allows you to have a metric of measurement. 

[Irk]

54 minutes ago, DeningWei said:

Technically they are still saying that they don't intend to wipe, that they will prefer to do a mix of removing depopulated severs and adding new servers instead.

They made this clear at the conference.

On the topic of wipes, this thread is starting to need one.

[Sorrelon]

2 hours ago, LilNastyGurl said:

Would upping the rates technically solve the grind problem? 

Up the harvest rates and players are still limited by carry weight. A better solution would be keeping the harvest rates as they are and decreasing the crafting costs and taming times.

[BobRoss]

3 minutes ago, iAmE said:

No, the poll is data, and you are trying to dismiss it as "Uncredible" despite the fact that it is, backed up, by third party objective data, in a reasonable way. That is your interpretation, opinion, and it has no founding or backing beyond being your opinion. 

But you're following me around in threads asserting that my data isn't credible and that people shouldn't take polls as an accurate representation of a community, particularly when community data corresponds with the findings of the poll?

I mean, like I said, you can have your personal opinion that the polls aren't credible, but following me around saying that my data isn't credible because it's a poll is a little different.

you mean the poll being backed up by third party objective data? how is that? people voting their opinion is subjective therfore the data is subjective. Which is normal for a poll. i dont even give my opinion about the content of the poll, i just said its a poll, taken by a small part of a community without informing the community its being taken. 

you say community data corresponds with these polls? what data are you referring to? and its not my personal opinion that these polls are unreliable. its common sense. especially given the circumstances under which people have been voting for them and seeing the ammount of people voting for them.

9 minutes ago, iAmE said:

A group of 700 votes can be representative of a community of 100k to a pretty strong degree, and next, there is no evidence that people have cheated in a statistically significant amount because the objective data still supports the outcome of the poll.

they can be, when it are random 700 votes plucked from people out an entire playerbase, not 700 people that visit the same forum where people mostly come to complain or when they are generally unhappy about something and need to vent. 

14 minutes ago, iAmE said:

English isn't my native language either, and I don't think you're statistically illiterate because you don't seem to understand how data is gathered, or statistics are formed. You can be great at interpreting data, I wouldn't know because we haven't even gotten to cover that, but from what we have covered, you don't know how to weigh statistics and feedback across multiple platforms from a diverse group. You don't know that a poll is relevant, even if it's biased, and you don't even seem to know that all data is, inherently biased when taken in a piecemeal fashion. 

You likely have some degree of knowledge about statistics in a general sense, likely in a business background, so you are basically the end user of the statistical data, and struggle to understand what goes into compiling the statistics that you get to look at in nice graphs and tables. 

The ending issue is this; all statistics are biased, all data is biased. It is gathering the data and plotting/recognizing trends that allows you to have a metric of measurement. 

you literally said i sont understand data nor its collection, so thats that. but then again you seem to stuborn to actually read anything i write so let me be clear once and for all. 

the conclusion YOU came to being 'the game lost players and this patch had a negative impact on the overall game' cannot be made yet. thats all im saying. i have said before you could be right, you could be wrong, we dont know that yet. 

I HAVE ALREADY SAID MULTIPLE TIME THAT THE POLLS AND SOURCES YOU KEEP REFERRING TO ARE NOT TO BE DISREGARDED OR FORGOTTEN BUT NEED TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. WC JUST NEEDS TO BE CAREFUL AND REALISE THEY ARE WHAT THEY ARE, SMALL RESPRESENTATIONS OF A PART OF THE COMMUNITY. 

there i put it in CAPS for you so this is the last time i want to hear you spout nonsense about me disregarding info. 

not all data is biased, not all statistics are biased, thats stupid. if 100k people play ARK and a poll would ask all 100k people wether they want fliers back like they were or like they are now we would have an unbiased statistic with subjective data into it. but that way there can only be 1 way to interpret the statistic. and aslong as there is nothing like that available to us we cannot spout around opinions as facts the way you are doing 

[iAmE]

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

you mean the poll being backed up by third party objective data? how is that? people voting their opinion is subjective therfore the data is subjective.

Therefore all data is subjective because all social data is subjective, because all social data is derived from the opinions of one person, hundreds of times.Since all data gathered by the poll can be supported by Steamcharts, why isn't it credible? Because it's an opinion? Opinions are kind of what we are trying to gauge here.

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

 i just said its a poll, taken by a small part of a community without informing the community its being taken.

The community was informed that it was being taken, just not extensively, but enough so that hundreds of people gave their opinions. Also representative of a population.

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

you say community data corresponds with these polls? what data are you referring to? and its not my personal opinion that these polls are unreliable. its common sense. especially given the circumstances under which people have been voting for them and seeing the ammount of people voting for them.

No, it's your common sense, and your opinion. Steamcharts shows a marked decline in player activity since the patch, compared to other patch days, and a decline in general, since the patch was released. That corresponds to the patch being a negative influence on the game, as evidenced by both polls. The circumstances of the polls, and the people voting in them, are irrelevant. They are still people, their opinions still matter in a data set concerning the game, where activity is predicated on the opinions of people on whether the game is worth playing. 

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

they can be, when it are random 700 votes plucked from people out an entire playerbase, not 700 people that visit the same forum where people mostly come to complain or when they are generally unhappy about something and need to vent. 

700 people saying they are unhappy with the state of the game. A marked decrease in player activity. Three thousand negative reviews on steam in two days. Every forum related to Ark, basically being on fire. Devs scrambling to do PR damage control on almost every form of social media. 

You do realize that 700 people is still 1% of the game population saying the change is bad, right? You do realize that numbers are down, compared to their last patch day, by close to a fifth, right?

700 Votes, normally, doesn't mean anything. It's a drop in the bucket. Bucket isn't full, but, 700 votes in a poll, and all this other stuff?

This is what most people would call a trend.

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

you literally said i sont understand data nor its collection, so thats that. but then again you seem to stuborn to actually read anything i write so let me be clear once and for all. 

the conclusion YOU came to being 'the game lost players and this patch had a negative impact on the overall game' cannot be made yet. thats all im saying. i have said before you could be right, you could be wrong, we dont know that yet. 

It can be made with all available data to us, in the short term. These are the differences spoken of when gauging the short term and long term influences on any particular thing. As far as data goes, what I have presented, is reasonable and significant in the short term. Maybe not in the long term, like you're saying, but we don't have long term data, and the devs have said that the long term doesn't matter (By stating they will be changing things soon, a decision reached using short term data).

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

I HAVE ALREADY SAID MULTIPLE TIME THAT THE POLLS AND SOURCES YOU KEEP REFERRING TO ARE NOT TO BE DISREGARDED OR FORGOTTEN BUT NEED TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. WC JUST NEEDS TO BE CAREFUL AND REALISE THEY ARE WHAT THEY ARE, SMALL RESPRESENTATIONS OF A PART OF THE COMMUNITY. 

This caps lock vent here doesn't even apply to me. My previous post did nothing to indicate that I thought you thought that my data should be disregarded or forgotten. I have just shown that the data is credible (Also, for the record, arguing that data isn't credible is pretty much tantamount to saying it should be disregarded, but I figured that was lost in translation somewhere)

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

there i put it in CAPS for you so this is the last time i want to hear you spout nonsense about me disregarding info. 

I haven't done so in several posts, but, ok, I guess?

28 minutes ago, BobRoss said:

not all data is biased, not all statistics are biased, thats stupid. if 100k people play ARK and a poll would ask all 100k people wether they want fliers back like they were or like they are now we would have an unbiased statistic with subjective data into it. but that way there can only be 1 way to interpret the statistic. and aslong as there is nothing like that available to us we cannot spout around opinions as facts the way you are doing 

You just said "people voting their opinion is subjective therfore the data is subjective.", literally in the same post. You're contradicting yourself because you don't know how data collection works, nor how to weigh data without clear cut and one dimensional answers and columns to aid you. 

Realistically, I'm not here spouting opinions as facts, everything I type is my opinion, however, I am not afraid to discuss and show what informs my opinion. You seem to confuse the two. 

[BobRoss]

49 minutes ago, iAmE said:

Therefore all data is subjective because all social data is subjective, because all social data is derived from the opinions of one person, hundreds of times.Since all data gathered by the poll can be supported by Steamcharts, why isn't it credible? Because it's an opinion? Opinions are kind of what we are trying to gauge here.

The community was informed that it was being taken, just not extensively, but enough so that hundreds of people gave their opinions. Also representative of a population.

No, it's your common sense, and your opinion. Steamcharts shows a marked decline in player activity since the patch, compared to other patch days, and a decline in general, since the patch was released. That corresponds to the patch being a negative influence on the game, as evidenced by both polls. The circumstances of the polls, and the people voting in them, are irrelevant. They are still people, their opinions still matter in a data set concerning the game, where activity is predicated on the opinions of people on whether the game is worth playing. 

700 people saying they are unhappy with the state of the game. A marked decrease in player activity. Three thousand negative reviews on steam in two days. Every forum related to Ark, basically being on fire. Devs scrambling to do PR damage control on almost every form of social media. 

You do realize that 700 people is still 1% of the game population saying the change is bad, right? You do realize that numbers are down, compared to their last patch day, by close to a fifth, right?

700 Votes, normally, doesn't mean anything. It's a drop in the bucket. Bucket isn't full, but, 700 votes in a poll, and all this other stuff?

This is what most people would call a trend.

It can be made with all available data to us, in the short term. These are the differences spoken of when gauging the short term and long term influences on any particular thing. As far as data goes, what I have presented, is reasonable and significant in the short term. Maybe not in the long term, like you're saying, but we don't have long term data, and the devs have said that the long term doesn't matter (By stating they will be changing things soon, a decision reached using short term data).

This caps lock vent here doesn't even apply to me. My previous post did nothing to indicate that I thought you thought that my data should be disregarded or forgotten. I have just shown that the data is credible (Also, for the record, arguing that data isn't credible is pretty much tantamount to saying it should be disregarded, but I figured that was lost in translation somewhere)

I haven't done so in several posts, but, ok, I guess?

You just said "people voting their opinion is subjective therfore the data is subjective.", literally in the same post. You're contradicting yourself because you don't know how data collection works, nor how to weigh data without clear cut and one dimensional answers and columns to aid you. 

Realistically, I'm not here spouting opinions as facts, everything I type is my opinion, however, I am not afraid to discuss and show what informs my opinion. You seem to confuse the two. 

im going to end this here, you can go ahead and believe that these sources provide relevant information onto wether or not this patch has had ANY impact on player activity at all. 

meanwhile i just checked the steamcharts again and there are more people playing ARK right now compared to monday before the patch so yeah no real decline in player activity. if the impact was so big we would see people who played during the weekend to test the patch stop playing and online players would be at an all time low right now. 

but i respect your opinion and will leave with that  everyone chooses what they believe and what not

[Ranger1]

3 hours ago, invincibleqc said:

Something I find  quite funny, my Wyverns are flapping their wings faster while idling than sprinting. Logic, isn't it?

Birds that have wings designed for efficient gliding can hold position with little wing movement if they catch a thermal (example: Albatross or Hawk). 

Birds that aren't designed for gliding must flap even harder if they are attempting to hover in one spot because the physics of flight aren't working in their favor without forward motion (example: most song birds).

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say I think Wyvern's are designed more to fly via brute power rather than gliding, hence flapping faster to hold position.

[Deadman]

Such a huge overreaction to a video game lol. All the doom and gloomers will eventually calm down and realize this won't have catastrophic effects on the game. Fliers were OP, they needed to be nerfed. Fliers made land creatures almost obsolete in alot of cases so i've been expecting them to fall back down to earth for a while now. Everyone always forgets they're playing an EA game, would they have gotten such a huge overreation had they done this before the game was even available to be played? Nope, nobody would have even noticed. There will be changes, its not a final product. This is what it means to be Early Access.

[SnowyGrass18]

i bet they didnt even think about what would happen to pve servers from taking hours of finding good tames to possibly days or even weeks

[Ranger1]

2 hours ago, Rickyh24 said:

Wow. That's awful. My favorite bird is now useless. Another reason for me to play this game even less. Oh well. 

Okay, on that note I spent last night tinkering with various fliers... and since you seem chiefly concerned about speed I'll share this with you.

I grabbed an untrained level 150 Ptera (155 by the time the experiment was completed) with a stamina of 441 from the Southernmost tip of Herbivore Island to the Northernmost tip of the Dead Island.

It took me exactly 8 minutes, including the 5 stops I needed to make along the way to regain stamina.

I'm sorry Rickyh24, but when I can cross the entire island in 8 minutes I can't support claims that a flier is "useless".

[SnowyGrass18]

8 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

Okay, on that note I spent last night tinkering with various fliers... and since you seem chiefly concerned about speed I'll share this with you.

I grabbed an untrained level 150 Ptera (155 by the time the experiment was completed) with a stamina of 441 from the Southernmost tip of Herbivore Island to the Northernmost tip of the Dead Island. It took me exactly 8 minutes, including the 5 stops I needed to make along the way to regain stamina.

I'm sorry Rickyh24, but when I can cross the entire island in 8 minutes I can't support claims that a flier is "useless".

that doesnt make not useless from how long it took before to now

[BobRoss]

10 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

Okay, on that note I spent last night tinkering with various fliers... and since you seem chiefly concerned about speed I'll share this with you.

I grabbed an untrained level 150 Ptera (155 by the time the experiment was completed) with a stamina of 441 from the Southernmost tip of Herbivore Island to the Northernmost tip of the Dead Island.

It took me exactly 8 minutes, including the 5 stops I needed to make along the way to regain stamina.

I'm sorry Rickyh24, but when I can cross the entire island in 8 minutes I can't support claims that a flier is "useless".

but its not in 1 minute without stops so it doesnt count!!!

[SnowyGrass18]

13 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

Okay, on that note I spent last night tinkering with various fliers... and since you seem chiefly concerned about speed I'll share this with you.

I grabbed an untrained level 150 Ptera (155 by the time the experiment was completed) with a stamina of 441 from the Southernmost tip of Herbivore Island to the Northernmost tip of the Dead Island. It took me exactly 8 minutes, including the 5 stops I needed to make along the way to regain stamina.

I'm sorry Rickyh24, but when I can cross the entire island in 8 minutes I can't support claims that a flier is "useless".

try going cross map with a argy and quetz AND omg bred flyers will get reset to 100 movement when the patch go through nooooo!

[Herbalthought]

8 hours ago, Emmant said:

Was I the only one that percieved Jens post as super arrogant?

That wasnt Jen posting that was a corporate damage limitation response put through their voice acct in the community ie jen acct

Jen is more your typical wanna post constant crap and dribble on twitter type of gal......................


 

[Herbalthought]

3 hours ago, BobRoss said:

 

it does, ive used them before, just make sure you're riding the fastest and fly in a straight line. or dont even ride a quetz at all and ride an argy/ptera

just roflmfao how is that gonna work now ? sure we all got a fastest q now dont we ^^

Really think before posting  especially considering what the subject is lol

[GladiatorLT]

This massive nerf just changed the game completely. What people mostly enjoy is taming, building or raiding.

Taming: to find high level animals (145-150) I have had to fly around for 2-4 hours and kill low level ones, whether I am talking about frogs or quetzels. Had to kill 67 quetzels once to have 150 spawn in. It was excruciating, took 4 hours and had to land so often with dragon cause it kept running out of stamina. Now stamina is 1/4 of what it used to be lol... same with any animals, fly around all map killing low ones looking for a high one. Now all that looking is increased 2-3 times.

Building needs massive farming. It isn't the fun part to farm, but if you want a cool and strong base, you farm. It took me a month to build my base. Not, however that quetzals cant help in farming it would take 5-10 months to build it back if i got raided... would be an offer to quit.

Raiding: I do like these changes, because it is a lot harder to raid now, and I'm more of a building/breeding person. No more 20 c4 turtles no more battle quetz that flies around fast and far and is hard to catch. But for those who enjoyed it... only sure way to raid is to bring in a titan, which at this point is a double edged sword bringing back to point 2. Titan will level the base and as states in 2nd point, rebuilding the base is 5-10 times harder now, would force people to quit. 

Maybe i am wrong and just not seeing some greater vision. I hope I am, and game will be balanced again so people can do things they like, we shall see.

[jcmeyer5]

9 hours ago, GamerPerfection said:

v2 of Flyer Nerf means 2nd Pass, therefore v2 Flyer Nerf =/= More Nerf.

Of course it's not going to get worse.

Famous last words...

[ilShadow]

So in response are they going to make it so Bronto/Paracer/Diplo can climb mountains to get to the majority of the only metal deposits? Or am i going to have to horse mountain climb like back in the skyrim days? Wiggle, wiggle, hop, wiggle, wiggle, hop......

[ilShadow]

4 minutes ago, GladiatorLT said:

This massive nerf just changed the game completely. What people mostly enjoy is taming, building or raiding.

Taming: to find high level animals (145-150) I have had to fly around for 2-4 hours and kill low level ones, whether I am talking about frogs or quetzels. Had to kill 67 quetzels once to have 150 spawn in. It was excruciating, took 4 hours and had to land so often with dragon cause it kept running out of stamina. Now stamina is 1/4 of what it used to be lol... same with any animals, fly around all map killing low ones looking for a high one. Now all that looking is increased 2-3 times.

Building needs massive farming. It isn't the fun part to farm, but if you want a cool and strong base, you farm. It took me a month to build my base. Not, however that quetzals cant help in farming it would take 5-10 months to build it back if i got raided... would be an offer to quit.

Raiding: I do like these changes, because it is a lot harder to raid now, and I'm more of a building/breeding person. No more 20 c4 turtles no more battle quetz that flies around fast and far and is hard to catch. But for those who enjoyed it... only sure way to raid is to bring in a titan, which at this point is a double edged sword bringing back to point 2. Titan will level the base and as states in 2nd point, rebuilding the base is 5-10 times harder now, would force people to quit. 

Maybe i am wrong and just not seeing some greater vision. I hope I am, and game will be balanced again so people can do things they like, we shall see.

Imagine trying to get a quetz now. for the first time. You are going to need a 4 man team on argies, one to dart/track while the other rests

[Rickyh24]

40 minutes ago, ranger1presents said:

Okay, on that note I spent last night tinkering with various fliers... and since you seem chiefly concerned about speed I'll share this with you.

I grabbed an untrained level 150 Ptera (155 by the time the experiment was completed) with a stamina of 441 from the Southernmost tip of Herbivore Island to the Northernmost tip of the Dead Island.

It took me exactly 8 minutes, including the 5 stops I needed to make along the way to regain stamina.

I'm sorry Rickyh24, but when I can cross the entire island in 8 minutes I can't support claims that a flier is "useless".

I never mentioned a Ptera. Thanks for the info though.