Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48
  1. #21
    I've seen The Volcano today. I like it, mainly because it is finished. The Crystal Isles look pretty in places and terrain is more sofisticated, but they lack any decor (ruins etc) and have many areas that are still basically empty. The Volcano has a little bit of everything and lots of nice spots to settle in.

    I don't know what the plan is for the donor server. If it is supposed to last forever, then Crystal Isles map has more potential. If it's supposed to be exchanged to something new from time to time (every 6/9/12 months), then playing a map that is already complete is a much better idea...

    Anyway, I'm offline until Monday. Might be able to check the forums a couple of times, but certainly no more testing.

    P.S. Bob wants PvE too

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Chogata View Post
    I
    P.S. Bob wants PvE too
    I've been giving PvE a stronger consideration since so many folks have chimed in on wanting something like that.

  3. #23
    Added another server to throw in during testing. The map is called Tartarus. This is the least developed map in testing, but my first impressions are that it has a lot of potential (check out the ice and poison wyvern caves!). It will have all dinos, bosses, some added dinos like crystal isles, and aberration style caves deep underneath. It's also nice that the map creator has walled off development areas to prevent possible base loss during updates.

    Server IP: HappyDiggers.net:33015 (not a steam link)

    You may see a long list of HappyDiggers Ark servers now, well that's part of the testing too

  4. #24
    I've seen the Tartarus. Yes, it looks like it has great potential, but it's in very early stages of development imho. I think if we tried to play on it, we would get bored very soon, unless the developer is funded and works with lightning speed

    Also, it looks like it's quite hard to get even a basic amount of crystal. I hate it when I have to first tame a ptera to get a spyglass

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Chogata View Post
    we would get bored very soon
    That pretty much sums up what would happen on any PvE map we make though regardless of size. Anything cut off from the cluster won't have access to all the different options other maps have. Our The Center Primitive Plus Server was isolated from the cluster and for a year or so it had such a low player population because people would get bored in a few weeks.

    Any map chosen needs to be considered for longevity, so short term development isn't really a bad thing. We had Valhalla during development and it was one of the best maps on Ark for a time. We also had Rag before it was considered official DLC.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Jiro_89 View Post
    That pretty much sums up what would happen on any PvE map we make though regardless of size. Anything cut off from the cluster won't have access to all the different options other maps have. Our The Center Primitive Plus Server was isolated from the cluster and for a year or so it had such a low player population because people would get bored in a few weeks.
    I agree, except I need to scratch PvE from this sentence. Anything isolated will die out eventually, be it PvE, PvP or the "mild PvP" model used by current HD servers. See how TFC donor servers slowly died out, because everybody preferred to play on Freebie, to be able to play with non-donor friends. I have a feeling you think PvP will be more enticing, but honestly, if it's limited to the same small group of people - how long will you guys be happy to wage wars amongst yourselves before you get bored too?

    That's why I was asking about what the plan is for donor server, is it supposed to last as long as possible (as is the style of regular HD Ark servers) or is it supposed to be a server with a map/features/play style changed periodically. Personally I think for the donor server the latter would be more interesting. But that's only me, I don't know what the other donors think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jiro_89 View Post
    Any map chosen needs to be considered for longevity, so short term development isn't really a bad thing. We had Valhalla during development and it was one of the best maps on Ark for a time. We also had Rag before it was considered official DLC.
    Ragnarok was much more advanced, than Tartarus is now, when you launched it on HD. It would have been (was) an interesting map even if it had never been completed. Same can't (yet) be said about Tartarus. I don't know who is developing Tartarus. If you have confidence that it will be developed, and the speed of development will not be dismal, then it's not a bad choice. If it turns out to be, well, we can always ... (gasp!) ... start over

  7. #27
    I've seen the new map. Not bad either. Is anybody but me testing?

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Chogata View Post
    I've seen the new map. Not bad either. Is anybody but me testing?
    Pretty much

    I've started to notice an increase in the RAM usage for the current servers which is probably related to re-activating all of the Ark plugins again. I'll be working on optimizing which plugins are used to find the culprit.

    In the mean time, I'm partial to ISO crystal islands as a Scorched Earth Replacement. I liked the original idea of making it donor only, but realistically it has a low population count for a reason. Crystal Islands will probably run as much RAM as Ragnarok, which is fairly high, but salvaging Scorched Earth's RAM would help negate some of that impact.

    I'm expecting Extinction to correlate with Aberration in RAM size as well, but if the Ark devs go and make a really big map, then we may have to adjust our expectations a bit on what I can and can't add.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Jiro_89 View Post
    I've been giving PvE a stronger consideration since so many folks have chimed in on wanting something like that.

    Is it possible to have 1 MAP connected to all the other that has no PVP on it or does it need to be completely separate from the cluster ?

  10. #30
    it needs to be cut off, for balancing reason. Example:
    Player A has a base on Ragnarok. He only builds there, he does transfer sometimes to SE or Island but only to tame or to have some adventures. Then there is player B. He has a base on Ragnarok AND the "pve map". He has all his valuable Stuff on the "pve map", farms there, breeds there and does Boss fights there. After he did enough preparations on the "pve map" he decided to raid player A. Player A sees the tribelog on the next day and decides to take revenge. But sadly player B doesnt have anything valuable in his Ragnarok base, its more an outpost. Player A cant do anything against player B but player B can do much against player A. As you can see everyone who doesnt have his main base on the "pve map", has a very big disadvantage. Thats why you would have to seperate the map from the whole cluster.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •