Stealthchange: Dinos can no longer be claimed when timer runs out

[elweasel2010]

What Cinnamongod said. Not that WC listens to their users.  I know I have a crazy idea. Test the changes in the wild before changing all servers. Kinda like that No-tame server. Maybe not deal with Nitrado. IMHO their server hardware sucks.

[monomania]

On 11/16/2017 at 3:45 PM, Shoosty said:

I think it's a good change, for reasons Eli already highlighted.   WC has made some very dumb changes (gasoline nerfs, for example), but this isn't really one of them.  

Yes, it will stink seeing that rock ele or uber giga or high level wyvern just vanish and not be claimable, but it wasn't yours anyway, so what did you lose?

I lost the only great loot in this game, wasnt mine ?!?! it could have been. 

[mackyishere]

No solo player will have any chance of retrieving anything if they take a 1 week vacation

[Mystalias]

23 hours ago, mackyishere said:

No solo player will have any chance of retrieving anything if they take a 1 week vacation

Why not allow alliance members to refresh timers as well as feed dinos? Or at least be able to claim if the timers are under 24h?

Or maybe one of the points of these changes is that more solo people should be on single player or private servers that can disable the decay? That would technically reduce the pressure on officials...

[invincibleqc]

8 minutes ago, Mystalias said:

Why not allow alliance members to refresh timers as well as feed dinos? Or at least be able to claim if the timers are under 24h?

I don't think this should be implemented. Alliances are already heavily abused with alt accounts or characters that they transfer in and out the server just so they can bypass the 500 tame limit of their main tribe on official PvE servers. By allowing alliances to reset them, it will just make it easier for them. However, dinos of your alliances are already eating from your troughs ( check the wiki for a complete list of features). Also, I don't necessarily think alliances should be able to claim your dinos. I mean, this is your responsibility to maintain your stuff, none of their business in my opinion.

[Palenor]

On 11/14/2017 at 4:56 PM, monomania said:

Ah WC adding another nail in the coffin of this ridiculous game.

If that is the case, what are you waiting for? Quit already why don't you?

Complain, complain, complain, you will still be playing next year......

[elweasel2010]

Yes, complain. Look what happened when Battlefront II players complained about their issues with pay-to-play loot boxes. So many players complained that the major news outlets started covering the story. EA's stock prices fell. Disney took notice and called EA. Next  day EA removes loot boxes. As players we can only voice are issues with games by complaining or by our wallets. Right now we are complaining but if these poor decisions continue, then WC will start feeling it in their wallets and maybe Snail games will call they. One can wish.

[Olivar]

1 minute ago, elweasel2010 said:

Yes, complain. Look what happened when Battlefront II players complained about their issues with pay-to-play loot boxes. So many players complained that the major news outlets started covering the story. EA's stock prices fell. Disney took notice and called EA. Next  day EA removes loot boxes. As players we can only voice are issues with games by complaining or by our wallets. Right now we are complaining but if these poor decisions continue, then WC will start feeling it in their wallets and maybe Snail games will call they. One can wish.

This is not even remotely close to the trash heap that's EA.......

[invincibleqc]

3 minutes ago, elweasel2010 said:

Yes, complain. Look what happened when Battlefront II players complained about their issues with pay-to-play loot boxes. So many players complained that the major news outlets started covering the story. EA's stock prices fell. Disney took notice and called EA. Next  day EA removes loot boxes. As players we can only voice are issues with games by complaining or by our wallets. Right now we are complaining but if these poor decisions continue, then WC will start feeling it in their wallets and maybe Snail games will call they. One can wish.

In my opinion, you cannot compare such scandal to Wildcard removing claiming on their servers. The loot boxes you are mentioning were affecting the game-play in general allowing players to pay/gamble in order to obtains stronger weapons giving them advantage over other players. I personally have nothing against games that offers loot crates as long as they contains only cosmetics and no advantages. The claiming system has been disabled to help on the capped servers preventing players from claiming and hoarding dinos. And let me reiterate a response I gave into another thread: this is not a game-breaking change, but a new official server rule. If it doesn't suit the way you want to play, you can always host your own server with claiming enabled or search into the thousands of community servers that might have this option enabled.

[elweasel2010]

It is close enough, just much much smaller. Yes there are no loot boxes but instead of fixing bad server hardware and piss poor optimization WC keeps focusing on new crap. This is not new for WC. Just look at SE. A paid DLC that was sold to the players not once but twice. Yes I bought SE (on sale 6 months later) But I refused to buy the season pass because it contained something I already had purchased.  

[Olivar]

1 minute ago, elweasel2010 said:

It is close enough, just much much smaller. Yes there are no loot boxes but instead of fixing bad server hardware and piss poor optimization WC keeps focusing on new crap. This is not new for WC. Just look at SE. A paid DLC that was sold to the players not once but twice. Yes I bought SE (on sale 6 months later) But I refused to buy the season pass because it contained something I already had purchased.  

1. A DLC is not a loot box. It's an expansion to the game, offering new content
2. The SE DLC was justified in that they needed the money
3. The SeasonPass gets discounted if you already have the DLC, you're not paying for it twice
4. How can it be close to loot-boxes if there's no lootboxes involved. If WC started charging money to open the drops across the map, or sell boosters to increase the drops THEN we'd be on the same level.

[invincibleqc]

1 minute ago, elweasel2010 said:

It is close enough, just much much smaller. Yes there are no loot boxes but instead of fixing bad server hardware and piss poor optimization WC keeps focusing on new crap.

Did you miss the whole turret change they are making in order to gain server performance? Server performance is definitely a priority for them.

1 minute ago, elweasel2010 said:

This is not new for WC. Just look at SE. A paid DLC that was sold to the players not once but twice. Yes I bought SE (on sale 6 months later) But I refused to buy the season pass because it contained something I already had purchased.  

That argument is invalid. The Season Pass contains 3 expansions. If you already own SE, you get 33% off.

[elweasel2010]

But that is the problem here. You stated previously that this is not the solution to the problem. IMHO this is just a band aid to problem. A real solution would be what I have stated. Improve the server hardware(but that costs money) and Freaking optimize the program (but that cost money and time). No WC decided to limit that game. At this point it is clear that you have ur opinion and I have mine and we will never agree on this issue.

[Olivar]

Just now, elweasel2010 said:

But that is the problem here. You stated previously that this is not the solution to the problem. IMHO this is just a band aid to problem. A real solution would be what I have stated. Improve the server hardware(but that costs money) and Freaking optimize the program (but that cost money and time). No WC decided to limit that game. At this point it is clear that you have ur opinion and I have mine and we will never agree on this issue.

Are you going to pay for the server hardware?
They are offering us these servers FOR FREE!
Most companies that offer servers for their game set up subscriptions or run cash-shops to sustain that expense.
WC doesn't, they offer them to us without additional cost.

And increasing the hardware is a band-aid as well if your software is consuming resources like crazy.
They're better of fixing the software and imposing limits than going for the expensive hardware solution

[invincibleqc]

5 minutes ago, elweasel2010 said:

But that is the problem here. You stated previously that this is not the solution to the problem. IMHO this is just a band aid to problem. A real solution would be what I have stated. Improve the server hardware(but that costs money) and Freaking optimize the program (but that cost money and time). No WC decided to limit that game. At this point it is clear that you have ur opinion and I have mine and we will never agree on this issue.

The thing is that there is no "magic solution" for server cap. The only solution that would "fix" it would be to disable taming completely. Wildcard does everything they can to find solution to that problem. They first started by adding a per-tribe tame limit. Players started using alt accounts to store creatures and bypass said limit. Now they disabled claiming. They also are currently working on a re-work of the kibbles tree which will make players not having to hoard dozens of females of each species just to cover their taming/imprinting. But this requires a lot of testing, because it will affects a very large portion of the game so they have to their time to implement it correctly. Also, Raw Mutton was definitely a beneficial step into that direction. In conclusion, everything they can do to help is more than welcome and are all a piece of the solution to the problem.

[Mystalias]

On 11/21/2017 at 1:23 PM, invincibleqc said:

I don't think this should be implemented. Alliances are already heavily abused with alt accounts or characters that they transfer in and out the server just so they can bypass the 500 tame limit of their main tribe on official PvE servers. By allowing alliances to reset them, it will just make it easier for them. However, dinos of your alliances are already eating from your troughs ( check the wiki for a complete list of features). Also, I don't necessarily think alliances should be able to claim your dinos. I mean, this is your responsibility to maintain your stuff, none of their business in my opinion.

(I was saying that they are already allowed to feed, so why not timer refreshes or the ability to 'save' a tribe's dinos that are about to expire. Last 24h only.)  This is mainly for pve servers, which currently don't have a way to really take a vacation for more than 8 days before you lose everything. It also makes dino loans and similar arrangements more risky if the player never returns. I just don't like seeing people lose their hours (and in some cases much more time) of work just because they couldn't log in for a week, which is why I made friends and kept an eye on timers in the first place. Now I have even less reason to care about neighbors... and that just doesn't seem right.

On 11/22/2017 at 6:30 AM, invincibleqc said:

The thing is that there is no "magic solution" for server cap. The only solution that would "fix" it would be to disable taming completely. Wildcard does everything they can to find solution to that problem. They first started by adding a per-tribe tame limit. Players started using alt accounts to store creatures and bypass said limit. Now they disabled claiming. They also are currently working on a re-work of the kibbles tree which will make players not having to hoard dozens of females of each species just to cover their taming/imprinting. But this requires a lot of testing, because it will affects a very large portion of the game so they have to their time to implement it correctly. Also, Raw Mutton was definitely a beneficial step into that direction. In conclusion, everything they can do to help is more than welcome and are all a piece of the solution to the problem.

People getting around the tribe limit seems to imply that limit is too small for some players. (Boss running/mass breeding easily needs hundreds of creatures to provide the materials and genetics.) Some of this we can probably attribute to the kibble system and the slow rates some creatures lay eggs. The other part is how many creatures you need for running a boss successfully. Most I see running rexes, yuty and daodons or some other large creatures, and they are constantly breeding more to replace losses. (As well as a sheep farm to mutton tame fresh blood to add to the lines.)  If crops acted like prime meat did (or even just improved effectiveness) we could probably reduce some of the egg layers that are just for herbivores too. I know increasing the tame rates would also have an impact on this because I've been on unofficials with 10x (5x under new rate) and most people on those two or three servers only had creatures they used, instead of sprawling bases. So maybe 50 to 100 instead of tame capping and alt tribes for extras...

[Foxpup]

At most bases are still a great way of nabbing blueprints and gear when the autodecay timer is up.

When the base is within render distance of other players the structures will reamin until either no one is around or the server restarts.

This allows a keen eye for anyone looking to grab a spot, or gain some loot. What I do is wait for the timer on structures to "pop" and start demoing key areas of the base (ie storage boxes, smithys, etc.). Then after I'm done I leave the area and the rest of the base Poof's from existence for me to come back and start building myself.

I do apologise about kick-starting an old thread, but the info is useful as far as Dino's no longer being claimable and the entire render distance thing for inactive bases.