Poll: Withdrawal of ARK mods?

When we launched the ARK cluster at the Season 1, we agreed to limit the number of mods to a maximum of 10. This limit was revised to 12 a few months later.

At the launch of Season 2, we already offered 13 mods. Today we are at 15.

The results ? More and more players, even with very recent and acceptable PCs for this game, are exceeding 8 to 10 minutes to connect to one of our servers.

It is true that some mods are heavier than others: S +, Steampunk and CKF to name a few. But removing 2 small mods could already reduce loading time by one to two minutes for most of you, which is not negligible.

Finally, it is well known that the more mods, the less stable a server (especially ARK); and the stability of an ARK cluster is fundamental: small rollbacks on certain maps, slowness sometimes, update problems, or even crashes are often due to too many mods.

However, we do not want to remove mods arbitrarily: admins are not necessarily aware of the use of mods in all bases of all tribes on all servers.

I therefore propose a survey to determine within a fortnight which mods we could withdraw. This is a survey with one to two possible choices from a list of four mods that we consider "non-essential", but with the possibility of proposing other mods that you could - you - consider as "sacrificable" 🙂

We will take stock at the next general meeting, starting on November 17.

Thank you for your participation !

If you had to remove 3 mods on the ARK cluster, which would they be?
25 votes Â· 75 answers

As an indication, here are the sizes (on the server) of the 4 mods proposed in the survey:

  • Eco Garden decor = 397 MB
  • Server Donation System = 462 MB
  • Dino Tracker = 21M
  • Real Phoenix = 64K

16 Replies to “Sondage : Retrait de mods ARK ?”

  1. personally, I vote eco garden and server donation, the 2 heaviest to load, for info for those who do not know how to go see the mods, in order 287mo - 339mo - 7mo - 1mo.

  2. I am surprised not to see Dino storage in the list because I thought I read on the discord that the mod had not supported the last update and that it should not be used so why keep a mod that serves to nothing ?

  3. take Jurassic away and you end up with lots of bases without enclosures, which will be forced to make enclosures with 36,000 walls, much longer to load graphically and more data for the server too (and hello crashes than people who have a foam pc will have passing over certain bases .. and then what next we will also ask to have a limit vote structures at 2000 so that they can go everywhere?) .. then transfer dino storage; a mod that weighs nothing, certe that bug at the moment (but just wait for a maj of the mod), and a mod that is ultra useful, I do not understand there xd
    Anyway in general it is not by transferring mods that weigh less than 100mo that it will change anything (unless we fire them all and finally there are only 2 mods that weigh almost 100mo the others are so tiny that I even see no need to talk about it. It's only by transferring at least 2 or 3 big mods that we will feel a difference.

    I calculated the weight of each type of mod:

    - Jurrasic: 90mo

    - all decoration mods: 1.6 GB - 2 decoration mods, donation, and medieval.

    - steampunk: 1.4GB

    - all utilities: 295 MB
    s +: 40mo
    stacks 500: 24mo
    longLasting: 93mo
    auction House: 86mo
    spyglass: 0.8mo
    dino storage: 40mo
    dino tracker: 7mo
    the scrolls: 4mo

    - Phoenix: less than 1MB

    Then anyway over time, by force of DLC, maj ark, the game will always require a slightly more powerful pc each time, we do not realize it immediately then one day you see that it turns more like before. and yes, that's how it is for all the games in fact almost .. So each time there will be a survey to remove mods to allow people who do not want to face the truth that when their PC has become a reality a little too fair for this game?

    1. @ Hélyos: everyone has recently seen the impact of a large number of mods on our ARK servers (Dino Storage v2 / Steampunk / S + / ...)
      All ARK admins know that the more mods there are, the more compatibility and stability concerns there are.
      If you do not trust my judgment on the matter, know that I regret it, but that I persist on the subject. If you want more information, I suggest you go read the official forum, and even the forums of other games with dedicated server. This is a problem common to all games.

  4. @Selune: I never said that the presence of mods had no impact on the stability of the servers, of course that it has, the more you add the more you are likely to create an imbalance or even create an incompatibility. And I never said either that I did not trust your judgment for the management of your servers. I repeat and I persist in saying that if you do not have the right equipment to play Ark you should not take it out on the servers or the mods installed on the said servers.

    @Red Having no first-hand view of who participated in the survey or not, I unfortunately cannot answer your first question, I can only refer to the conversation on the discord that preceded the implementation of the survey.

    1. Thank you for your answer and your clarifications. We agree on the fact that we need suitable equipment. For ARK players in the community to have the best experience, the server must be configured so that its stability is also. We cannot satisfy everyone, but we must take into account the fact that we must try to allow as many of our players as possible to be able to play on our servers. Otherwise, the community would lose its raison d'être. The admins are not there to satisfy the players individually, but taking into account the general interest.
      In this case, I remind you that there are ARK servers on one side, and game clients on the other:
      ARK servers are installed on a machine at OVH, and its hardware is suitable but limited (in particular by the CPU and RAM memory capacity).
      The clients of the game are installed on the computers of the players of the community, and have variable performances: not everyone has access to a PC Gamer very powerful.
      In my article, I explain that too many mods have negative consequences on ARK servers and clients.
      It is not a question of "sacrificing playing comfort" for a small number of players who would refuse to invest in a more efficient PC. It is above all a problem at the server level. Regarding customers, we are not responsible for the equipment used by members of the community, and do not wish to "restrain" all of the players for a few others. Our reflection must take into account the general interest, and it is for this reason that we have initiated a reflection on the possibility of withdrawal of certain mods.
      But no decision has been made. This is only a collective reflection, which we wanted, we admins, to undertake with all of the ARK players. You would not see this kind of approach in many other communities.
      As for the final decision, it will certainly be up to the ARK admins team, but not before the next general meeting (which should take place on 11/23). We will therefore have the opportunity to talk about it all together.

Leave a Reply