Best Of
Re: Hard cap for Node citizens count
Do you truly believe that an uninformed person would have enough money to purchase and sustain a citizenship that's way over softcap? Cause I don't.Well i wouldnt say its for "stupid people", and more for "Uninformed people". Since there will be enough guides for the game, that even someone stupid will know not to do something that is not worth it.
And i dont find it as that good idea to punish uninformed players either. Since this is the way you make them quit the game.
Also, I would definitely expect Intrepid to put a HUGE pop-up during the citizenship acquisition process post-softcap of "YOU WILL BE PAYING THIS TIMES AS MUCH AS THE NORMAL CITIZEN, BECAUSE YOU'RE JOINING THE NODE TOO LATE!!! ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THIS?! ARE YOU FUCKING DEFINITELY SURE?!?!"
Players become "Informed" when the game informs them. If there's literally zero in-game text telling you that you're about to do something really stupid - Intrepid have failed to inform their players. And yes - that would be a bad thing.
Ludullu
1
Re: Hard cap for Node citizens count
Which has been my entire point so far.Well if you put it this way - this is no different than a hard cap right?
And that's exactly what a shitton of stores do. Especially the ones that sell luxury goods.its like saying a shop wants to sell no more than 100 items a day. and instead of stopping the sales after the 100th, they increase the price from 10$ to 3000$ for single item.
It's a way to remove money from stupid people.
I've answered this several times already. I want the same in Ashes, except now that removal is good for the node and for the server's overall money pool.And yes this will work, I just dont see why you are ok with this and not with hard cap since they are the same
That's the point. We don't know what they want. I'm almost fucking sure THEY don't know what they want, cause it's been obvious that they're designing the game along the way rather than beforehand.Also i doubt this is the intended cost increase Intrepid meant to put.
The point is that it's a cap.For me "Soft cap" has the meaning that after the cap, you still get benefits, just not as good as before the cap.
With what you describe - the loses are much more than the benefits. So i cant really consider it as "soft cap",
If after 100 cd reduce (which for example can be 66%). you put 10 more cd reduce, and the % becomes 65. This is no soft cap. its hard cap
The point is that you're still wasting skill point on this skill cause you're dumb. It's a literal bait for stupid people, and I want that shit in the game so that stupid people waste their resources on needless things.
Ludullu
1
Re: Hard cap for Node citizens count
Does it though?It just becomes worth it for 150 more players to be citizens of the node for the high taxes.
You're doing the thing I love to do. You come up with a design in your head and then you argue against that. You've, seemingly, come up with a static relatively small increase to taxes and you think that it's not enough to dissuade people from joining a node super late.
As I see it (and hope how it will be), each subsequent citizen over the soft cap will be paying an ever-increasing cost, which will be increasing exponentially.
Even with really good node benefits - the cost for absolute majority of people will (or definitely should) simply be too high. And if a few megarich dudes manage to join the node even at that cost - great, they've wasted a shitton of money (and will keep spending more shittons of it) on a single buff.
To me, this is the same as super high overenchant lvls. Do super rich people benefit from them way more than the plebs? Of course! Does the insane cost of them equalize the overall power structure on the server? Of course! Except in the node's case it's even better, because the money cannot be redistributed to other players, while in the OE process you'd be buying out entire markets-worth of stuff.
This simply becomes a good glint sink, which is an incredible gold sink because each glint has the potential to be x10-100+++ its amount in gold.
Ludullu
1
Re: Hard cap for Node citizens count
I feel like we have a different view on what "soft cap" even IS in this context.thats if people try to get in the metropolis when it already is metropolis.
Usually from village stage you can see which of the neighboring nodes is furthest in development. And all players will join it from early stages, Since its most likely to not get locked as vasal. Which will just make this particular node progression even faster.
Atm this is not the case since node progression is capped to low levels, no vasal system. so no reason for any of this
I see it as "say, lvl3 node has 100 citizens as a soft cap. If you want to be the 101st - you're paying x10 the initial cost and your taxes are at least x5 of the normal ones". And that shit grows exponentially from there.
No reasonable person would go for that kind of payout just to be in the same node as their guild or friends. Because they'd now be a burden to their guild/friends. You can't afford better gear as easily, you can't afford to run your own caravans/crates as easily. You can't repair gear as often. You'd be literally crippling yourself with these expenditures.
And yes, I'm sure there'll be some massive guilds that will still try getting their members into the same node, even if the costs ARE that high. And I see that as the best thing ever, because it's literally a direct snowball limiter. Because now, instead spending the guilds resources on growing the snowball - they're just in one fucking node
Good for them.Hard cap on citizenships will simply let those massive guilds snowball in their regular ways. And that's shit.
Ludullu
1
Re: Hard cap for Node citizens count
Soft cap is better because it would force people, who want to all be in one node, to splurge insane amounts of money just to achieve that, while the payoff is nowhere near as good as spreading out your political/economic/influential power.
This is literally risk/reward. If people think that the reward of being in a single node is worth the risk of wasting a shitton of money - let them. Everyone else who spreads out will benefit more, because they'll still have their big sacks of cash AND have more influence on the region.
Hard cap completely removes that part of gameplay.
This is literally risk/reward. If people think that the reward of being in a single node is worth the risk of wasting a shitton of money - let them. Everyone else who spreads out will benefit more, because they'll still have their big sacks of cash AND have more influence on the region.
Hard cap completely removes that part of gameplay.
Ludullu
1
Re: Amazing world, painfully dull grind
When i mine Ore's in the World of Worst of ever Story-written Warcraft,
i get EXP.
When i pick up Herbs in Worst of ever-Story-written Warcraft -> i get EXP.
I can't remember when this was patched in. But i liked it. I really really liked it. It was definitely one of the best Additions to the Content of the whole Game.
The Option to do something else than to senselessly slaughter countless Mobs over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
Did You Guys ever heard something,
alone the Lines of like : " Power ... ... ... ... usually always comes with a Price. "
When i - in Phase 1 during the likes of Middle-November or so,
had killed S~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MANY Goblins - that i had the feeling between insane headache i had something that felt like a drop of blood maybe bleeding inside my brain or so,
you know a HOT-COLD-WET-"tingle" somewhere inside my brain. ()
I decided the Prize is too high.
It is just too high.
I gave up around 5% of EXP after reaching LvL 11 towards LvL 12,
and i was disappointed into myself and felt bad for no longer being able to test. But that was my Limit.
Jepp.
Figured i better stop. I should admit it here right now.
In WoW Vanilla when levelling was insanely hard -> before Burning Crusade -> the ever first Expansion of Worst of Warcraft -> i managed to level THREE Characters up to LvL 60 back then - which was the Max-Level in WoW Vanilla,
and it was no biggie. It was doable. It wasn't bad. I don't know what was so different in Ashes of Creatio Phase 1 killing Mobs around Aela/the Starting Area.
But it felt different.
It felt like i am chained down. And i am struggling for every single Percent of EXP for every Level. Knowing fully well i would be set back should i die even a single time..
I'm in the same boat as you, the 6 days played of solo questing in vanilla felt doable and even enjoyable. The clear difference in ashes is that the game does not feel intended to be solo'd, there is no clear progression durotar, to crossroads, to wailing caverns, etc. You do not feel like you're where you are supposed to be ever in ashes. I never got the sense that I had a functioning class and rotation.
Re: Risk, Reward, Difficulty & FUN: What Intrepid is Missing
Zerging content is only good when the entire zerg benefits from it. That will not really be the case in Ashes, because loot and resources are limited, so the optimal way to farm is to split up your zerg into proper farming parties and let them grind out mobs/bosses.ordotemplarii wrote: »To sum up, the actual levelling process is extremely noobie, zerging up and grinding mobs. Now does that necessarily mean the end game combat is noobie too, no not necessarily, but its hard to imagine the developer not continuing in that direction for all future mechanics.
As for the difficulty of any given mob - we're noooowhere near any kind of point where we'd know how the game will look like on release. We have pretty much no mob AI, no skill depth both on our chars and on mobs, no properly difficult bosses and no finished weapon passives.
All of those things can wildly change players' interactions with the mobs and the game itself. And while I do agree that most likely Ashes will never be at the lvl of smth like WoW's Myth+++ or FF14's Ultimates - it can still come out as a game with some difficult pve. But we'll only know for sure 2-3 years from now.
Ludullu
1
Re: Steven, Please Rethink “Not for Everyone”
To the point about the mid and late game… this isn’t a game yet. I agree that right now there is not any “end game” content but that will come with time. Honestly you won’t even get max level for a while so end game won’t even be in reach for a long time. Right now we are at most in the mid game with the current level cap. This is also with the lack of many systems that have yet to be introduced. I guess what I’d ask is what kind of mid or end game would you be looking for?
I’m not saying everything needs to be fully fleshed out right now. But when most of what we’re shown or hyped about is late-game content like sieges and raid bosses, it creates the impression that the early game is just a grindy placeholder. That’s risky, especially for a game banking on long-term retention and word-of-mouth.
Players need to feel that spark from the start, even in alpha. If early game isn’t exciting now, it’s hard to imagine it magically becoming engaging by launch unless it’s made a clear priority.
Re: Amazing world, painfully dull grind
everything seems to have a generic mmo feeling to it and nothing really stands out and screams "this is why AoC is unique and fresh"
I think this will be the 64 class system and the dynamic world. The world truly needs to feel alive by things changing depending on what the players are engaged with. If they fail to create unique class combinations that actually function and play differently from each other I will probably not enjoy this game. That is the single thing that draws me to the future of this game. In every mmo I play I want to feel different from everyone else. If I don’t feel that it’s not exciting.
Re: Steven, Please Rethink “Not for Everyone”
And no one else will, exactly because Intrepid's approach has fully proven that you SHOULD NEVER tell players about the development process.Saabynator wrote: »I mean, open development/no NDA... How many does that?
Your response to Noaani about "hype around release..." would've worked if people didn't know what the game was about. See Chrono Odyssey for example. People were really hyped for it until they realized that it's just a NW clone. And they only realized that because CO released a beta test.
Ashes is holding a near-permanent ALPHA test, where nothing is done and everything that's being done is moving at a snail's pace. And that is game development for a newer team under an unexperienced leader. But the fact that everyone who's interested in the game can just come and see that the game is barely moving, the design is all over the place and the direction can often contradict itself - none of that will support the release hype of the game.
Every damn scam game that overpromised the world and underdelivered a piece of shit had more hype than what Ashes will have by the time release comes along.
And I would love to be wrong, because I myself believed that we're barely even 1% of the people that will be there on release, so the majority will get hyped for the game, as you say. But the more time passes, the more I feel like my initial assumption was the wrong one.We already gave examples of the games where these systems were present. And Ashes doesn't even compare to the space games, cause its supposed depth doesn't even reach "you can build your own stuff and other players can interact with it".Saabynator wrote: »You might say, that they are easy to implement in other games, but they havent does it though.
I tested an Alpha for a new EVE game and that shit had space buildings that could function as trading posts, as turrets, as stores and had the potential to be coded by the players themselves to be near-anything players wanted. Ashes is nowhere near that kind of freedom.
So yes, it is that easy to add this stuff into a game. Other studios don't do it because it's too much work for too little payoff, when you only care about that payoff. And yes, it's cool that Steven can kinda disregard the amount of work his ideas require, but it's a double-edged sword, which, in the context of "open development", hits the studio more than it benefits it.
I think you are being a bit bitter. So you dont like the pace of the game, so leave it alone and come back. Is is slow? For a game this size, I dont think so.
I def think there is a lot more hype surrounding the game bexcause of open development. The monthly videos is also something I know ton of people are looking forward to. Hell, I think a ton of people are talking about the game, because streamers can stream with no NDA.
The point about a lot of features is, AoC has taken a ton of features into their game. Some of those features, whole games are made around. They took it as part of their features. If they deliever, which personally I think they do, this will be the biggest MMO that ever launched.
Sound like a lot of you alpha testers are wanting this to move along way quicker than it is. To me, it looks like an unrealistic look at what speed a game of this size is developing at. Step away, take a break for some months and come back. Your annoyance and bitterness will only grow from here.
Steven is unexperienced as a game developer. But he has an age where wisdom comes into play. He has been around, he played a ton of games, he knows what he thinks is fun. He didnt hire all new guys here either, he hired some good devs.
