Jump to content

Arkasaurio

Members
  • Content Count

    471
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

Community Reputation

174 Making moves

1 Follower

About Arkasaurio

  • Rank
    Cloth Armor

Personal Information

  • ARK Platforms Owned
    PC

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As @RasFW mentioned, the community tends to be way better. However, for me the ideal is "As much like official as possible (reasonable rates, open PvP), with S+, and admins that can/will actually fix problems in short order." However I am willing to compromise heavily on the "like official" part to get S+ and active administration. Only things I'm really not game for are ORP (or extremely complicated anti-raiding rules), ludicrous rates, and well the whole reason for this thread, wipes every 3 months. You might be right about it being impossible to maintain unofficial PvP without scheduled wipes, as that has certainly been my experience. Again though, it does seem odd to me at least, that there isn't a community of people that want that. I'm hoping either I simply haven't found it, or no one has quite figured out the right formula to make it work yet. I also totally get you on the hosting being like a second job... Seriously, watching the admins field toxicity and whining all day about this that or the next thing, get on at all hours to trouble shoot things for people, then have to make a tough no-win decision that drives off half the player base that then goes on to spout more toxicity publicly to anyone who will listen, ALL FOR A SERVER THEY PAY FOR BUT DON'T EVEN PLAY ON, I'm honestly not sure how anyone does it. I also don't understand how shallow, ungrateful and immature people have to be to look at that situation and say the admin is "abusive," when something doesn't go exactly how they want it. So while I might be displeased with these clusters promising no wipe, then wiping anyway, I don't blame anyone and give a hearty thanks for the good times before moving on. I mentioned earlier if I could I'd create this myself, that's actually not true, I don't have the patience of an absolute saint to deal with that the kind of venom and insanity that server admins seem to have to deal with on a daily basis.
  2. Lmao... their reputation proceeds them ?. Forza has some really good points at times, but with a bias so palpably strong gotta take everything they say with a grain of salt. Preferred pronoun would be helpful. I can't say I'm surprised, this or the server simply folding has happened to every no wipe server I've ever played on. Clearly like the way you think! Will catch you on discord again.
  3. A lot of what you're saying here is absolutely true, but it largely applies to official servers. Sure there are alphas and alliance systems which does lead to stagnation, but the mega problem doesn't really exist on unofficial. However your idea of admin abuse on unofficials is way different from mine. I've read enough of your posts on here to know you're a hardcore PvP player, and that's cool, probably the way you should be on official and definitely your prerogative to set your own play style. However a lot of folks play unofficial to still PvP but with fewer of the salted earth tactics employed on officials and admittedly a lot of folks are looking for something that plays a lot more like PvE. Bad rules are subjective though, your bad rule might be another's golden rule. Even poor admin decisions in your or my opinion don't constitute abuse, it just means the admin has a different view point. What does constitute abuse is continuous uneven enforcement of any rules in place to favor one group over the other, plus all sorts of crap that never happens any more on any server worth it's salt, like spawning in bunch of stuff for the admins tribe. Anyway, I don't know you beyond your posts, but I've had bet a lot of money you don't love the unofficial scene ?
  4. Really good point, and I get it. The rush of trying to climb to the top of the heap when everyone starting at the bottom is really fun, and certainly things can get stale once the server/cluster has reached equilibrium. What I've seen though, is that this is frequently used as part of the justification for a wipe sometime after some issue that's caused a lot of players to stop playing, but there's still some thing/things that cause that initial player die off beyond bordem. It doesn't have to be a controversy either, could be as simple as the server hosting provider giving poop service causing crashes and rollbacks. Remember I am talking about declared "no wipe" servers. But as I said that is a really good point and major part of the equation. However, for one I'd think there would be more than enough unofficial players looking for the experience I'm looking for to populate a cluster. Maybe there are and I haven't found them yet, I'll need to check out @RasFW's server for instance, but honestly with what I do for a living, I'm probably far better at finding things on the internet, than I ever will be at playing this game ? . Secondly I wonder if there are admin choices that could help mitigate that issue? I've thought for a while there could be something around partially wiping a cluster seasonally. Say there are 5 maps, you'd give your players warning 2 weeks ahead of time that 2 are wiping and after the wipe those severs has transfers disabled for 2 week. Gives new players a chance to build up, and is constantly giving existing players something new to fight over. If server population grows to support it, instead of wiping, just add more maps. Before anyone feels the need to point out, "Why don't YOU go make your ideal no wipe cluster?" I would, in heartbeat, if I had the knowledge or time to acquire it. Also, there seems to be this trend already referenced of admins not playing on there own servers, so even if I made my ideal I probably couldn't play on it, lol. Maybe I am...
  5. Appreciate the attempt, but most if not all of the servers I've tried the owner/admin didn't play there. Also, to be clear, NONE of the servers I'm talking about died because of true admin abuse. When there is controversy the admin has to do something, and with any controversial decision someone is going to feel like they got the raw end of the deal. Certainly there is real admin abuse out there, but admin abuse IS NOT any time the admin makes a decision that I don't agree with and is against my own personal best interest, however that is exactly how it seems like the majority of players see it. Any time a decision doesn't go their way spew toxicity in discord until getting banned, then go drop 5 negative reviews on ArkServers (or what have you) telling a one sided and often patently false narrative about how the server is so unfair and the admin favors his friends, etc. Anyway, I don't think admin abuse has ever really been the problem, rather players don't seem to understand how game hosting and participating etiquette works.
  6. I made the full jump from official to unofficial a few months after Ark released. Honestly between access to good mods (s+), admins that respond generally in hours, and better overall community, the game is a LOT more to my liking on unofficial aside from one important thing... all unofficial PvP servers seem to have a seasonal wipe schedule, generally every 3-6 months, so there is no long term longevity. Yes there are "no wipe" unofficial PvP servers out there, but over the last year I've seen every good one I've played on eventually announce a wipe and then move to a seasonal schedule. That, or the population dies off and even if the server still runs it's completely underpopulated. The process goes something like this from what I've seen: 1. Skilled server admin launches new "no-wipe" server, spreads word within their network, makes reddit posts, pays for some ads on Arkservers, etc. 2. Things are great for 3-6 months. 3. Some major controversy happens within the community. Actual cheating, allegations of cheating, hard griefers, allegations of griefing, well organized tribe enters and just starts stomping everyone else etc. etc. 4. Admin makes a decision and takes a course of action - regardless a large segment of the players are unhappy with that decision (no winning). Admin is accused of favoring one side, between controversy, possible banning of offenders, and friends of the offenders leaving, server population dwindles. 5. With Battlemetrics showing that played hours and number of unique players have just fallen off a cliff, and with several months run time, very few new players join the server. Population continues to dwindle. 6. Wipe is announced in order to present a fresh server to entice players to join OR server completely dies out. 7. Process starts all over again; this time admin may feel that going "no-wipe" is impossible and just start with the seasonal plan. Note: All mention of servers above also applies to "cluster of servers" as most really solid unofficial servers are now in small clusters. I would really really like to play a pvp server that doesn't get wiped without going back to official; persistence or the possibility of it has always been one of the most interesting things about Ark to me. However, I 100% understand the position that admins, even those who want to run no-wipe, are in. Seemingly, you wipe or your server dies, people always want that fresh start. Even RP servers are usually seasonal, and while I can understand it's probably fun to restart the story, I'd also think if there's one place where having servers build up long histories would be embraced it'd be there. At the same time, I feel like I can't be the only person that doesn't want to be forced to start over every 3-6 months (no matter how successful I am) without having to play officials. Is there a solution? Am I the only weirdo that wants this, while everyone else playing unofficial PvP loves the seasonal thing? (btw, I'm playing reasonable rates stuff, I get why you wipe frequently with 75x) Does anyone have a good PC PvP server that fits the bill ??
  7. Definitely helps get rid of spammed and abandoned rafts. They also added the leeds around the same time as they dropped the flier nerf. Leeds can almost be seen as a raft nerf, so it seems it was part of WC's goal at the time to make traversing the map more difficult and dangerous. I don't love the way they implemented the leeds, but before them a sunken foundation stone raft was pretty much invincible from a PvE sense, which also isn't very interesting.
  8. At first the leeds could belly flop in 2 feet of water. I haven't played much recently, but they introduced a despawn timer (or similar) for rafts didn't they? That was more geared at solving the issue you mention, which I agree is/was an issue. However, I'm not sure targeting raft spam was really the main reason they added the leeds. It came in around the same time they nerfed fliers and was another pretty clear indicator that WC wanted to make getting around the map more difficult. Love or hate that goal, it's one of the reasons they stated for the flier nerf, so I've always thought of leeds as a similarly aimed raft nerf.
  9. Gigas in the swamps are a problem, but in my experience rafts have always gone longer undetected (and un destroyed/raided) sitting in the swamps than anywhere on the open ocean, that was true before Leeds were in the game. There are a lot of little out of the way spots, its not as though meat runners are (usually) exploring every nook and cranny. If we're being totally honest here, the best place to hide a raft is as clipped into an indestructible rock formation as possible. I try to avoid blatant exploits of that type though.
  10. Glad you liked it . Imho, parking in the swamp was a better option than parking in deep water before the leeds even. Not many people stomping around the swamp on a giga regularly, and most with a giga aren't going to bother coming back to the swamp just to pop a smallish boat if they do find you. Main point is you've got high level players out in the deep see all the time, farming, underwater loot, etc. etc. There are only a few good reasons to spend time in the swamp, making it the best hiding place for boats.
  11. Putting the raft in deep water is no real defense against trolls anyway, people know that trick. Just go around the edges of the map on a flier with rockets and sink everything and because it's a boxy blob on open water, your boat sticks out like a sore thumb. Real advice? Keep your rafts as compact and low as possible, park in the deepest, nastiest, most snake infested part of the swamp as covered as possible by trees. Sailing through the swamp isn't all that annoying once you get used to it and no leeds there. Also, like everything in PvP expect to lose your raft from time to time.
  12. One of the main reasons they were introduced into the game is specifically to target rafts/boats. The speed boat can out run them. Also, punctuation is your friend.
  13. That's fair. I really don't think they'll do anything different in game to push players one way or the other, mostly because trying to do two different things is much harder than trying to do one. Look at all the issues we have now because PvP and PvE don't have separate enough rule sets. Anyway, I truly hope it works out for you, different opinion and different game mode, but the more happy Ark players out there the better for all of us.
  14. I was just expanding upon the band aid idea, it's a poor analogy altogether. Regardless, what was the better option, leave the servers as they are now, just let new players join? Open up transfers? Whether it's what you'd do, I think it's pretty obvious that leads to pillared everything in about the first day. Or did you want the wipe? I'm not saying it's the best option for you, and you're entitled to your opinion, but look at this thread, take into account the whole of everyone posting here. Do you really think more people would be happy with wipe or with open transfers? If it were just me, I'd say wipe it all, don't divide the player base, etc. but I give big kudos to WC because I think this is the option that's best for the most players and that allows them to keep their initial word while giving new players a fresh start. Where do the devs say legacy are inferior? Beyond that, here are some reasons maybe it's not as big of a problem as you think. 1. Newbies are going to get confused in the "super clear" game list UI and end up on legacy anyway. 2. People who've been waiting for release to buy will play with their legacy friends. 3. If salty vets move to the new servers just to grief new players, legacy might be more friendly. 4. Depending on launch success and whether people really do flock to new servers, legacy might be the only place with room. 5. People like you can continue to build your community on the legacy side. Recruit people to your sever, convince your friends to stay, do your part to make the legacy side be the place people want to be. However, if by your own omission the legacy servers are so inferior, why should they even exist in the first place? I'm not saying they are, but frankly I don't think any game mode that doesn't have the player base to support it should be officially supported. And I'll admit, that if there's a big a warning on release saying new players absolutely shouldn't play legacy because it's full of duping cheaters, then okay, this is a big slap in the face.
  15. Yep, true, but duping has been a problem at some point in pretty much every competitive online game with gear since forever. They do have find a way stop it, and no it's not going to be perfect out of the gate. Is it better than years of compiled duped, exploited, or otherwise now unavailable stuff, absolutely. And besides, they kept their word on not wiping, maybe they will keep it about having everything cleaned up by launch . People will get griefed, people will always get griefed. Hey I'll probably engage in some light griefing (just a little friendly hazing) on launch. However, throw new players into the servers as they are now (or allow open transfers), it's way worse. Likewise, wipe all the servers and those vets are going to salt the new earth with their saltiness. There was no perfect solution for all parties here, but this absolutely seems like the best compromise.
×
×
  • Create New...