Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about Phase II and Phase III testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about Phase II and Phase III testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Best Of
Re: For the love of casuals PLEASE
I wait to see the mayoral caravans and weekly castle caravans. And vassal networks binding nodes together to prevent sieges. Players are supposed to go and attack caravans from other nations, to weaken them. All that is missing.
Also Steven has to make people really care for their nodes, more than for the guilds living in them.
What's a nation supposed to look like? I think this is critical to the core of Nodes and Caravans. How could they not put this in yet? Depending on how it was done a Nation would really tie these systems together. Right now it's just all...? pointless I guess. If we could get some good RvR or NvN fights I'd be all in. Damn I hope they do something about this...
As the systems are now I don't care about Nodes. They're just tedious crafting benches. But if the core missing element was added (Nations maybe) then Nodes would have more purpose? It's hard to say without knowing what his plan is.
What is really annoying is IF there are core systems still out of the game why are we play testing it? What is the actual value they get from it? What's the point of the grind? To balance the mobs, the amount of materials? Does any of that even matter yet, won't it change as more areas are built. Won't the dynamics of player interactions change as the world grows and as new systems and introduced?
This vassal mode structure tells you what it looks like for a sovereign at a level six metropolis stage; and what it can control at a maximum vassal network is two level five nodes, of which a level five node can control one level four and one level three as direct vassals; and then the four can control a three; and every three can control a one or a two. Now if the three gets removed through siege, the one or the two is removed as well. So that's an important distinction between the three's vassals, which technically isn't really a vassal relationship because there's no citizenships possible. Those vassals don't exist between three and X, but they do exist between four and three, five and four, and six and five. And what this also allows is that because there are 85 nodes that are within the world, we have a buffer zone of about 20 nodes that lives in a max server state. So if you had maximum five metropolises form in a world, you will have a number about 20 nodes that can live alongside those metropolis networks; and when or if a metropolis falls, that extra cushion of nodes around the five metropolis structures allows for the map to be redistricted in a way that is unique. It doesn't mean that one of the fives is just going to pick up where the last six left off and form the same exact metropolis structure. From a territory perspective it has ancillary nodes to play with and expand towards that redistricts the map, so that if a metropolis falls there's a significant difference in the layout of the world and the layout of these almost nation-like territories.[1] – Steven Sharif
Steven said nodes do not belong to players. That those structures form in a way which is hard to figure out and influence.
The high level nodes will have more end game content (dungeons, crafting benches ...) and players might want to defend them because benefits them.
If a node is destroyed, people will lose materials stored there.
Can be that even if the game is balanced reasonably well, guilds will still attack and loot solo player's caravans, even if these solo players have the same citizenship. If soloers have no impact onto the balance of power, nobody will care about them.
I think this game is a social experiment. Steven hopes there is a golden cohort, a player category which wants a game like he described. But people will simply lose motivation to play the game and will not return when is finished. Especially if they lose things in a siege of a node they don't care for.
that's for the info!
Steven is placing too much trust in players. Having Caravan Nameplates and Loot Nameplates that show the player's guild, node, and religion will be good. So this might prevent some caravans from getting attacked by citizens of their node, ally nodes, same religion. But the risk is still basically zero for the attackers. I firmly believe there should be a faction style system that will make nodes hostel to players for attacking that nodes or vassals citizens. Guards only going hostel because a player is corrupt isn't going to be enough. You could have an enemy node's players in your node utilizing it, it's so weird.
The vassal system really seems to be the core of the balance of powers in the game. But as it's written there it's full of holes and ways to exploit it. The risk of to makers is too high, the risk to the takers is too low as it is currently. It does seem like a one sided risk vs reward system. If you're not part of a massive guild there is not viable way to defend a node, if there's no viable way to defend it then there's no reason to build it up.
I appears Steven only thinks from the massive group play. Will there be enough of them that stick around to make it successful? I doubt it. As the smaller guilds are cut off from content the players will start to leave, either for a large guild or for other games. As these smaller guilds dissolve there will be less content for the mega guilds. So the pvp content turns to the mega guild vs mega guild, but what will be their motivation to war? I'm making quite a few assumptions here because the lack of systems in the game to actually see how this will play out.
Volgaris
1
Re: For the love of casuals PLEASE
bloodprophet wrote: »I wait to see the mayoral caravans and weekly castle caravans. And vassal networks binding nodes together to prevent sieges. Players are supposed to go and attack caravans from other nations, to weaken them. All that is missing.
Also Steven has to make people really care for their nodes, more than for the guilds living in them.
What's a nation supposed to look like? I think this is critical to the core of Nodes and Caravans. How could they not put this in yet? Depending on how it was done a Nation would really tie these systems together. Right now it's just all...? pointless I guess. If we could get some good RvR or NvN fights I'd be all in. Damn I hope they do something about this...
As the systems are now I don't care about Nodes. They're just tedious crafting benches. But if the core missing element was added (Nations maybe) then Nodes would have more purpose? It's hard to say without knowing what his plan is.
What is really annoying is IF there are core systems still out of the game why are we play testing it? What is the actual value they get from it? What's the point of the grind? To balance the mobs, the amount of materials? Does any of that even matter yet, won't it change as more areas are built. Won't the dynamics of player interactions change as the world grows and as new systems and introduced?
Never built anything have you?
Putting the shingles on a roof before the foundation is done seems......odd.
Nice snidy mc sniderson. You could have just answered what "nations" were supposed to be in Ashes... no need to be a prick about it...
I get that they are putting systems in as they're ready. Which is fine. But play testing incomplete systems is pointless, and I'm not grinding again to get to the any new systems. At least not until the play testing is more fun to me.
Volgaris
1
Re: How playable is this game solo?
If you have game knowledge, it's very solo friendly, not optimal but friendly, I have basically played solo and I am 25, 600g, full semi bis armour, but it's all about game knowledge
Chicago
1
Re: How playable is this game solo?
The game is very obviously made to be played with other people. It's more dangerous to be on your own, but it's far from impossible to be on your own, and there is tons and tons you can do on your own.
It's more fun with friends, but it's quite easy to roam around solo.
If you're going against a little boss for a quest or the like, other people who might want the same thing tend to invite you to a group to take it down together, which is very rewarding~
It's more fun with friends, but it's quite easy to roam around solo.
If you're going against a little boss for a quest or the like, other people who might want the same thing tend to invite you to a group to take it down together, which is very rewarding~
VerySoft
1
Re: For the love of casuals PLEASE
Early game animal husbandry leveling is THE BEST investment in the game. Everyone will want a better mount later on, so if you're the first one to be able to hunt the higher lvl animals - you win.Try to make a profit w/player stalls, or yeah - you may have to sell your results for a loss to gain skill. It's called investment. When your skill is high enough to produce a mount that has higher demand and lower supply then go make some profit. Does this require caravans, no.
Even back in P1 there was a dude who sold apprentice mounts for great money and had a huge customer base. And then the more caravans there are in the world - the more beasts of burden people will need, so even the rng part of husbandry is not as bad as it might seem (even though I do hate it).
Ludullu
1
Re: For the love of casuals PLEASE
is that what you think I'm talking about?
If your arguing for caravans to be easier so 'casuals' can participate, then yes. If not , then not.
this is why you won't get why you're selling mounts for less than you make them for.
Try to make a profit w/player stalls, or yeah - you may have to sell your results for a loss to gain skill. It's called investment. When your skill is high enough to produce a mount that has higher demand and lower supply then go make some profit. Does this require caravans, no.
you'll blame pve... but realistically. ganking low levels is FAAAAR from pvp.
I'm not blaming anything - pve is great, but this is an ow pvx game. There are no pve only zones, so you have to fight other players sometimes to access the content you want or materials or gear. That's one of the core premises of Ashes. If you're getting killed as a level 10 running caravans because level 25s are attacking you, maybe you're not ready to run caravans.
CROW3
1
Re: For the love of casuals PLEASE
Why is the answer always "The game needs to adjust for me" instead of "I need to figure out how to be more effective in this situation"?
Verra is dangerous by design. So either gain levels & gear to be prepared for the fight, or find alternate ways to move material from node to node. I have never had a problem moving mats myself without a caravan.
Intrepid is not going to put the puzzle together for you.
the project is in development. Its not even a game yet, so there is nothing to change, but there are many things that can be adjusted. You say "gain lvls and gear, THEN caravan" what the heck is the point of trading if not to gain gold to buy gear or mats to make gear? You put the cart before the horse and act like the passers by are crazy for calling out the issue. Steven has said himself the end game is not the point, so WHY is the only argument ever "get to end game, then do this thing". It doesn't jive with the directors own words.
No, this isn't a catch-22. There are alternate ways of moving material, getting gear, and earning money outside of caravans. Caravans might be the most effective way of managing trading or earning money, but not the only way. Thus the bar for entry may be set higher because it's the most effective method.
Meaning - you have to have the skill / power / gear to be successful. If that translates to grinding a shit ton of materials and selling them locally to build an initial revenue stream while gaining levels with mobs or dungeons so that you can run a caravan and go toe to toe with level 25 bandits - then so be it.
CROW3
1
Re: Major Graphic Upgrade Needed.
TheDarkSorcerer wrote: »TheDarkSorcerer wrote: »I am a fan of AoC. But games like New World are way ahead in graphics over Ashes. I recently started playing New World on console. The world is beautiful and so lush. Ashes look very flat in this Alpha stage and very different from previous showcases.
Sure let's compare NW that's on Lumber yard engine and released to Ashes on UE5 when it's released lol. We're not even in the middle of A2. They are focused on adding all the system, not graphics at the moment.
The overall rebrand of NW and the launch on console is quite impressive. No performance issues. The world, nature and foliage renders beautifully.
And yet you are comparing a game that launch in 2021, and now relaunched with a refresh and updates and telling Ashes of Creation to be as good as them now, when Ashes is just starting Alpha 2... you do you see flawed logic? Ashes is not even in the polish phase where most of the tuning for graphics come. Allot of what we see in game is just place holders.
Re: Major Graphic Upgrade Needed.
You are confusing graphics and style. The graphics, even in alpha are actually amazing and surprisingly not too taxing. Chances are it's gonna look even better at launch. Now you real point is about the aesthetic or style of the game. It leans heavily on the realism side, much like New World and Throne and Liberty, just to name a few. It may look dull to some, but I absolutely adore it. It's gonna look like crap if your PC is a potato, though.
Re: Major Graphic Upgrade Needed.
I am a fan of AoC. But games like New World are way ahead in graphics over Ashes. I recently started playing New World on console. The world is beautiful and so lush. Ashes look very flat in this Alpha stage and very different from previous showcases.
