What happens to your Containers When ?

[hammrain]

Someone comes along and plants a totem nearby, and you no longer can gain access to your items that are in those containers ?

[Kinslayer]

I believe the person that placed the totem would have taken control of your baskets and changed the permission of them so you can no longer access them. I guess that would just be bad luck :(

[hammrain]

I can still set permissions. I just cannot open them, I get the cannot do that here message.

[Furyk]

I can still set permissions. I just cannot open them, I get the cannot do that here message.

your containers have been hijacked by Tribal land control, the leader of that tribe has the power to ignore your permissions and to assign anyone in his tribe the right to open your container too.

[FabricSoftener]

your containers have been hijacked by Tribal land control, the leader of that tribe has the power to ignore your permissions and to assign anyone in his tribe the right to open your container too.

This is an issue if you have large amounts of stuff without a totem and a new player comes along. However, existing tribes with existing landlots moving their entire camp to camp on your stuff is far more work then its worth. it took me forever to move 4 bins 1/2 a sector

[sionide]

This is an issue if you have large amounts of stuff without a totem and a new player comes along. However, existing tribes with existing landlots moving their entire camp to camp on your stuff is far more work then its worth. it took me forever to move 4 bins 1/2 a sector

It really isn't an issue at all. I am actually against being able to set permissions on bins outside your tribal land.

You put bins in the open world...sometimes they get taken. It isn't an issue, it's the risk you take. If you want to keep the items, then haul it back to your area.

[FabricSoftener]

It really isn't an issue at all. I am actually against being able to set permissions on bins outside your tribal land.

You put bins in the open world...sometimes they get taken. It isn't an issue, it's the risk you take. If you want to keep the items, then haul it back to your area.

yeah I could be on board with that. I really dont want to litter the world with bins nobody but me can access anyway to be honest and its not like someone taking my 10 small sheet metals as the crawl back home is really a game breaker for me :)

[bruisie159]

It really isn't an issue at all. I am actually against being able to set permissions on bins outside your tribal land.

You put bins in the open world...sometimes they get taken. It isn't an issue, it's the risk you take. If you want to keep the items, then haul it back to your area.

I suppose at launch is is knd of an issue for all those smaller tribes and solo players that are not allowed to set up a totem or homestead. Just makes them a little more vulnerable to griefing and accidental "theft" of their stuff, that plus not having a safe zone in the first place

[FabricSoftener]

I suppose at launch is is knd of an issue for all those smaller tribes and solo players that are not allowed to set up a totem or homestead. Just makes them a little more vulnerable to griefing and accidental "theft" of their stuff, that plus not having a safe zone in the first place

why not join a tribe just for the few days before homestead are possible?

I really think people are WAY over blowing this issue

[bruisie159]

why not join a tribe just for the few days before homestead are possible?

I really think people are WAY over blowing this issue

because i said in the other thread, there are multiple reasons why this effects solo and smaller tribes and this is just another one of them

[Marcus]

why not join a tribe just for the few days before homestead are possible?

I really think people are WAY over blowing this issue

Why not delay placing totems a few days until the homestead is working, that way everyone can place equally?

[FabricSoftener]

Why not delay placing totems a few days until the homestead is working, that way everyone can place equally?

we have already talked about this havent we?

If this were at all close to real life and you placed a camp on a very large set of flat land perfect for a large tribe you would have a zerg beat you to death for it.

having said that, I get the feeling that there will be so much land that it really isnt going to matter either way to be completely frank.

[Marcus]

we have already talked about this havent we?

If this were at all close to real life and you placed a camp on a very large set of flat land perfect for a large tribe you would have a zerg beat you to death for it.

having said that, I get the feeling that there will be so much land that it really isnt going to matter either way to be completely frank.

Have we? Not I...
regardless..

this isn't real life.... and typically, people like to be treated fairly when they pay for a game...

[FabricSoftener]

Have we? Not I...
regardless..

this isn't real life.... and typically, people like to be treated fairly when they pay for a game...

it actually not fair for 1 person to have the same equal chance at X as it does a zerg.

Its best to understand this straight away, yes in this game its possible and even intresting to play as a solo but it will and should be a different experience. you should not be able to do everything a zerg can do, otherwise why have tribes at all then why have complex interdependent crafting system in the first place?

I do not support the idea that a solo can do anything and everything that a large tribe can do. THAT would be a game changer for me and I would leave :)

[Marcus]

it actually not fair for 1 person to have the same equal chance at X as it does a zerg.

Its best to understand this straight away, yes in this game its possible and even intresting to play as a solo but it will and should be a different experience. you should not be able to do everything a zerg can do, otherwise why have tribes at all then why have complex interdependent crafting system in the first place?

I do not support the idea that a solo can do anything and everything that a large tribe can do. THAT would be a game changer for me and I would leave :)

You have the zerg.. i would say you already have an advantage at getting X before 1 person does...

[BigCountry]

who wants to play a "online game" by themselves? that is just retarded....

just play xbox or something.
lol

[FabricSoftener]

You have the zerg.. i would say you already have an advantage at getting X before 1 person does...

your single man tribe should not get more square foot property per person then a tribe with more than 10.

but really, this whole conversation is silly it really dosent matter than much that single player tirbes have more of an advantage over larger tribes it will all work out in the long run

[Marcus]

your single man tribe should not get more square foot property per person then a tribe with more than 10.

but really, this whole conversation is silly it really dosent matter than much that single player tirbes have more of an advantage over larger tribes it will all work out in the long run

I believe thats why single player folks are getting homesteads which are quite a bit smaller, no? I don't understand your point, but thats all right.

[hammrain]

Wow, ok, guess this was a topic of interest before.

All I wanted to know was if it was intended or not, and I see it is intended.

It was my mistake not to make a single tribe, and claim the entire junk pile before I started sorting it. Ok, it will all be evened out in a few days.

Thank you.

[FabricSoftener]

I believe thats why single player folks are getting homesteads which are quite a bit smaller, no? I don't understand your point, but thats all right.

Over the course of this conversation today I am actually making the following points to various people
1. homesteads or large tribes being possible for solo or not solo's is really not a big deal either way. People are blowing the entire subject way to be much larger of an issue then it is.

2. if its a game changer for you (whomever not you personaly) then leave the game and dont post threats of quiting in an obvious ploy to get what they want. people do that all the time and its really is lame, just leave.

3. besides, the system allows more square footage of space for a solo per person then for a large tribe anyway so the soloers needs to get some perspective on this.

[Marcus]

Over the course of this conversation today I am actually making the following points to various people
1. homesteads or large tribes being possible for solo or not solo's is really not a big deal either way. People are blowing the entire subject way to be much larger of an issue then it is.

2. if its a game changer for you (whomever not you personaly) then leave the game and dont post threats of quiting in an obvious ploy to get what they want. people do that all the time and its really is lame, just leave.

3. besides, the system allows more square footage of space for a solo per person then for a large tribe anyway so the soloers needs to get some perspective on this.

So you just sort of quote people, and then take the conversation in your own direction?
I'll keep that in mind when talking with you in the future... because..

1. I never said i had a problem with this.
2. I never said it was.
3. I never i said i had a problem with this either...

umm... have a good day.

[river111]

Got a couple things to say here on some things, probably none of them important but hey, what the heck huh.

First, the zerg over solo thingy - Hey you already get tons more benefit down the road as a large tribe that a solo player will NEVER get. A solo player will NEVER be able to upgrade thier tribe into a village or town. They will NEVER get to set up the town government, decide on thier currency, set up thier own bank, charge taxes, or have thier own AH. So lets not say they NEED to have first dibs on land because they need to have some special perk over solo players as they already do and more coming.

Second thing is this whole idea that by giving large tribes dibs is a bad thing, realy its not. Its not a good thing either, but not for the reason of what land they get. All this is going to do is allow the larger tribes more of a chance to pick plots closer to the mainstream - the Lake. And by doing this, it also forces the solo players away from that same lake front. Now I see this as a bad thing, it segrigates the large tribes from the smaller ones, allows for more 'click' mentality and shrinks the borders or controll by the larger tribes (if they had 8 small solo tribes around them then they would be protectors of them and in a way, more controlling over those lands - by sperating them liek this will do it makes the large tribes only care about thier own land and nothng else since they are backed up against nothign but larger tribes).

The one thing thats important on this is what would happen if they didnt force the segrigation on tribe placement days, and that is that it would force the tribes to explore and spread out more. And really isn't that a good thing? Shoudnt we be trying to get more landmass covered instead of trying to centralize into population centers like that? Wouldnt the tribal wars be better if the tribal zones of control were spread out more? Right now it is obvious most never leave the lake front. You can go explore and find so many places people could settle, prime spots they jsut never seen or bothered to go find. Shouldnt we be trying to get those settled more and not less?