Best Of
Re: Instanced Content Should Not Offer Power Gains
If you want to be taken seriously in a discussion, don't make numbers up.58 million dollars in ‘85 says otherwise, good is perspective, it’s an all time top selling game.
Super Mario sold over $70 million within the first three months of it's release, in Japan alone. Inflation adjusted, that would come to about $200 million now.
However, I have no idea why you are making up fake numbers for a game in a different genre, on a different platform, from a different millennium. I mean, it's not like you've made an argument with it, you just introduced it falsely stating it was good PvE, then you made up fake sales figures for it.
Honestly, what kind of reaction is it you expect someone to have to that?
Noaani
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
I hope this game has some RP servers. I use to run guilds in AoC (Age of Conan) and SWTOR and then tired myself out of hardcore raiding in games like EQ2, FFXI, and WOW. I now am a solo player as I haven't gotten as much time as the youth and I'm fine with that. I plan on doing some RP in this game and i will be mainly based off of being a exiled Paladin living off the lands hiding from the evil powers at hand that ruined my name. That will be my start to the game and I shall go from there. lol
With all of that being said I believe solo players can also have fun in this game as long as you set a goal of what you want to achieve. You can be a crafter and do work for a guild, or you can hire a group to farm mats for you. You can be someone that is a sword for hire. Watching a lot of anime maybe guilds can make quest for solo players to do. Watching this game for a while now it seems like there can be unlimited possibilities as long as players are willing to put in the work and make the game welcoming for everyone of all play styles.
With all of that being said I believe solo players can also have fun in this game as long as you set a goal of what you want to achieve. You can be a crafter and do work for a guild, or you can hire a group to farm mats for you. You can be someone that is a sword for hire. Watching a lot of anime maybe guilds can make quest for solo players to do. Watching this game for a while now it seems like there can be unlimited possibilities as long as players are willing to put in the work and make the game welcoming for everyone of all play styles.
Eastrid
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
This is meant to be a social mmo.
And it is for multiplayers.
So the problem solo players need to fix is themselves, being solo - make some friends.
It is going to be social, and it will have group content.
It doesn't mean that you should be grouped up whenever you log in to the game. It's silly.
I guess I'm having a hard time explaining this, and I see the exact same argument popping up from time to time.
Groups are there to do group content with, which the game will have plenty of. That's the social and multiplayer aspect, as you will spend more time doing that, than in any other recent MMO.
That however does not mean there should not be single player, or solo content. If I want to go out and explore, kill some mobs, level up, do some questing, or do whatever I want to, I shouldn't be held back by not being in a group. That's the content you should always be able to do solo.
The reasons why someone might play solo are numerous.
For example:
- If I only have 3-4 hours to play the game every day, I can allocate some of that time for playing with friends, or fellow guild members. However, I do want some freedom in how I spend my time in game. Being in a group does not allow for such freedom, as it's often about compromise, and you want to not inconvenience others you are playing with, the same way you do not want them to inconvenience you. This sometimes means you will do stuff together, even if you would rather do something else in game.
- This also means that if I'm playing with a group, and we are doing something, I cannot just pack my bags and leave suddenly to do something else, or log off.
- In general, I like doing what I want to do, whenever I want to do it. As a solo player, I can simply go from one activity to another instantly, while in a group it's not that simple.
- You just don't feel like dealing with/talking to people.
You are incentivized to group up for various things, for security, to actually be able to do a lot of the content, etc. The stuff you are incentivized to group up for, will also make you stronger.
The game shouldn't further disincentivize solo players by punishing them for playing solo. They are already at a big disadvantage.
---
The thing is, some design choices will inevitably make "solo players" suffer. Because such a huge portion of content is locked behind groups, some hard-locked (you simply cannot complete content solo), some soft-locked (you can in theory do it, but realistically you won't be able to).
OP made several examples. Caravans are one of them.
- In Archeage, you always had an option of less risky, or even risk-free option of doing solo trade-runs. Or if you actually wanted to make good money, there was risk of PvP, so you'd usually group up.
- In Ashes, it's always going to be a risk to run caravans, and if you are solo, it's really, really risky. But the thing is, it's risky also for groups, because there are always going to be larger groups preying on them.
This simply turns into a bigger group = win, for most of the content available. So the discussion shouldn't even really be about solo players, but about how bigger numbers will always be better in this game.
I do not share a lot of OPs concerns regarding group play, as I feel like many of these things have to be done in a group, for a good reason, but they do bring up some valid points around groups, and how small groups or solo players are often going to be at a heavy disadvantage.
Is there a way to fix that, without compromising the key pillars of this game? I'm not sure it's possible, or if it is, I'm not sure how you do it.
iccer
1
Re: Loot System Changes
Players can also to be kicked out from the group before the looting starts.
That is not a good thing
A guild need to fill to manage a raid.
They invite a couple of players, just to kick them before loot starts to ensure the guild gets the loot.
Or any raidleader really who want to make sure his competition is gone before the loot, so he kicks everyone who might need on the same drops.
don't group with that guild then ;3
Thank you for demonstrating the point. These sort of loot systems discourage players from assisting each other because the game enables very easy, unpunished ways for the group lead to screw people over.
you are only thinking about the immediate consequences, not future ones. A system like that promotes good behavior. this isn't a game where you will be running instances 24/7 and using cross server queues to go into them and never see the same person again (or be stuck with them). you can literally choose who you play with. play wit the good people. your actions have consequences. ruin your reputation in a server and you are doomed.
I’m thinking of the overall social atmosphere the game will create if these sort of loot systems are the norm. It’s not about immediate consequences, it’s about how players will not be encouraged or want to cooperate with others because the systems at play are designed to not reward them.
You are vastly overestimating how much influence a reputation will have when the large guilds most likely to abuse these systems are already set up to have immense influence over castles/nodes/etc. Most of the community will just shrug and tell slighted players the same thing: ‘well, that’s on you for not picking a group better’ as if it were their fault some people decided to be an ass.
As for the other portion of your post, if 1000 people show up to nuke a lvl25 dragon, I would first expect the dragon to scale up significantly so it doesn’t just fall over like a sack of flour.
Secondly, many games use some kind of metric to grant looting rights in the event of zerging like that. Whether that’s a fixed amount of damage done, time engaged with the boss, average threat held, healing done, damage mitigated, buffs contributed etc, would be up to the devs, but contributors to a fight should all be rewarded in some way even if it’s only crafting materials they’ll then have to take to a node and craftsperson to turn into something actually useful.
again, different game. the game promotes not doing shitty things like that to other people because of the social consequences. it promotes good behaviour. you do that to most people who play ow pvx games and you get perma camped out in the open world, for example. cant do that when you are in instance queues 24/7.
2nd point. raid wont scale depending amount of players., confirmed by steven. all contributors shouldn't be rewarded. as you said, other games do that, not ashes. not everybody is a winner here ;3
Social consequences should exist in addition to gameplay mechanics that minimize abuse potential rather that enable it. They are not a replacement for mindful reward systems, if they even work at all, which they're definitely not going to when that big toxic guild owns a castle or node. Good luck blacklisting the Patron Guild of the economic node.
Also, link the source for that change in raid approach, because it would be, in no uncertain terms, extremely idiotic to not have a scale-up mechanic on open world bosses.
Not a single person here is after an easy street farming experience, but everyone deserves to be rewards for taking on and defeating challenging content at risk of their time, gear degradation, PvP and PvE death penalties. I'm in full favor of instituting merit requirements to get looting rights as I said before, but that should be handled by the game, not by other players.
Players have proven many a time that they cannot responsibly handle those player-controlled loot systems.
no, nobody deserves to be rewarded. ppl don't deserve things. they earn it. do you think the big toxic guild you mention is gonna invite you when they could invite their own members? please xD
these type of games work differently. bosses will be fought over by warring guilds. winning the boss is still important and rewarding even if you don't get an item. not letting your opponents get it its still as good. you will eventually get the item you want. just see it as doing multiple runs of an instance to get that 1% drop or whatever. you don't always get something you need on each run and that's okay.
also, no need to link anything. watch the dragon stream again, steven mentioned it in a q & a
You're a shining example of why these loot systems are a bad idea. Anti-social behavior is bad for an MMO, and systems that directly encourage that sort of behavior while leaving the majority of contributors with nothing means you're going to have a very sparce population willing to do the difficult content.
Why would I or anyone waste hours of time for no gain? Why would I or anyone volunteer to help when the systems at play practically beg the group I'm helping to give me nothing for it? If bosses don't drop much of anything, why would I even care to go fight off another group to deny them it? Oh no, they got one armor piece for their 20man team and a pittance of crafting materials.
Whereas if I know there is a large stock of materials on the line because everyone gets Gathering drops and I have a lot of high-level players with maxed Gathering lines, I'll be fighting tooth and nail over control of those bosses to deny other groups looting rights. They can't contribute toward the merit thresholds if they're at respawn, and I stand to gain a lot.
Edit: The world boss was confirmed to adjust attacks based on the number of players engaged with it in the stream. Not sure what you were listening to that gave you the idea they wouldn't implement any anti-zerg mechanics. Here, timestamp 01:01:40 https://youtu.be/pfdnNWkUov4?si=rKKhZUK8E5Ncl2-F&t=3700
Caeryl
3
Re: Loot System Changes
The everyone gets a trophy crowd is gonna be disappointed.
As long as intrepid enforces in chat agreed upon loot rules it'll be fine. Don't play with people you don't trust or better yet join a guild.
There's a fundamentally flawed assumption that's it either '90% of the party gets nothing' and 'anyone who breathes near the boss gets super good loot'.
Having tiered loot like already mentioned is the best way to ensure no one is walking away with nothing to show as long as they've contributed enough for whatever merit threshold is put in place, similar to the mob tagging system.
Tier 1: The basic crafting materials based on Gatherer ranks, personal loot and only useful after entering the player crafting networks. Default: Common quality in small amounts, quality and amount adjusted based on specific Gathering levels and perk selections
Tier 2: General recipes and craft plans based on Crafting rank, % based drop and useless without the materials
Tier 3: Full gear, rare enchantment stones, trophy item, etc etc, the Rares: Bid system.
I don't think Lootmaster has any place in a healthy game climate. It's far too easily misused and there's no recourse for shitty behavior. (Just look at EQ to see how useless a social blackslist would be). If people want one person handing out loot, then that can happen organically after looting occurs with everyone willingly giving up their drops to be handed out. And if they don't want to do that? Well, sounds like the guild did a bad job inspiring guild loyalty.
In a game where they want a high amount of socializing and the politicking that comes with it, they shouldn't be using a loot system that enables risk-free bad behavior with high probability of nothing awarded for taking on difficult content. It a recipe for a barren PvE landscape where no one wants to bother trying to enter into it.
Caeryl
5
Re: Instanced Content Should Not Offer Power Gains
Why would anyone make themselves the Work of (hopefully) tough Instances - if there is not a single gain from it ?
An Ingredient. A Jewel. A whatever. Something People can use. Be it Artisan-Crafter Items or direct Drops. Our neighboring Nodes and Competition won't sleep. Will we be able to invest Hours for Hours into something that will not help us in any form of Power ?
An Ingredient. A Jewel. A whatever. Something People can use. Be it Artisan-Crafter Items or direct Drops. Our neighboring Nodes and Competition won't sleep. Will we be able to invest Hours for Hours into something that will not help us in any form of Power ?
Aszkalon
1
Re: What surprised you in the FireBrand fight?
I abhor the word elitism, but you'll eventually change my mind about that.While there were no surprises for any experienced or semi-experienced MMO player in that dragon fight, Steven sometimes presents things as if the target audience are new players to the genre as well. For someone who hasn't fought a dragon, or boss in general, sure, it might be a little surprising with some of the attacks or adds that give a soft-rage buff to the boss. I am guessing that's the lens it was intended to be viewed through.
I completely agree with this, but I think you are missing an important aspect.
In terms of PvE content, Steven is one of those new players. I'm sure the encounter did things he has never seen before - even if it is only basic mechanics at play to anyone that has run PvE content.
Anyway, Steven wasn't even the one who said that; that was all Chong. What's with the snarkiness?
I wasn't impressed by the fight either. I think the PvE-enthusiasts at this point have to recognise that they have to restrict their highest expectations to the announced instanced skillcheck encounters.
The main appeal for open world experiences will primarily have to come from mechanics that make PvX more challenging and interesting.
That said, I still have hopes in the team leaning more into gimmicks that might make the fight more basic-looking/predictable, but also more challenging in requiring more strict player coordination. (Not just instadeath effects, but things like damage immunity windows or damage reflections, or massive shield effects for the boss, or requiring specific player skills to break boss casts or effects, etc.)
I don't think Intrepid can handle the combination
of flashy/aesthetically impressive AND difficult/demanding/engaging, so I'm hoping they'll lean more into just making it challenging, without worrying so much about making it look perfect.
I think that's part.of what's holding them back from introducing more advanced mechanics.
and you got all that from an introductory, level 25 boss when the max level is 50, on a game that isn't even out yet and its in active development, and didn't even have the boss completely finished.
sherlock holmes has arrived
Guy thinks he's Moriarty -sighs- If I were Intrepid I'd be really annoyed you all keep talking down to Laetitian like this. Real over protective soccer mom energy when they just wanna have a good game.
JustVine
1
Re: What surprised you in the FireBrand fight?
I abhor the word elitism, but you'll eventually change my mind about that.While there were no surprises for any experienced or semi-experienced MMO player in that dragon fight, Steven sometimes presents things as if the target audience are new players to the genre as well. For someone who hasn't fought a dragon, or boss in general, sure, it might be a little surprising with some of the attacks or adds that give a soft-rage buff to the boss. I am guessing that's the lens it was intended to be viewed through.
I completely agree with this, but I think you are missing an important aspect.
In terms of PvE content, Steven is one of those new players. I'm sure the encounter did things he has never seen before - even if it is only basic mechanics at play to anyone that has run PvE content.
Anyway, Steven wasn't even the one who said that; that was all Chong. What's with the snarkiness?
I wasn't impressed by the fight either. I think the PvE-enthusiasts at this point have to recognise that they have to restrict their highest expectations to the announced instanced skillcheck encounters.
The main appeal for open world experiences will primarily have to come from mechanics that make PvX more challenging and interesting.
That said, I still have hopes in the team leaning more into gimmicks that might make the fight more basic-looking/predictable, but also more challenging in requiring more strict player coordination. (Not just instadeath effects, but things like damage immunity windows or damage reflections, or massive shield effects for the boss, or requiring specific player skills to break boss casts or effects, etc.)
I don't think Intrepid can handle the combination
of flashy/aesthetically impressive AND difficult/demanding/engaging, so I'm hoping they'll lean more into just making it challenging, without worrying so much about making it look perfect.
I think that's part.of what's holding them back from introducing more advanced mechanics.
and you got all that from an introductory, level 25 boss when the max level is 50, on a game that isn't even out yet and its in active development, and didn't even have the boss completely finished.
sherlock holmes has arrived
The problem with the way you defend Intrepid/engage other posters is that if you're wrong, it's really demoralizing.
These types of feedback don't come from thin air, Intrepid tells us things that imply we are supposed to be at least a little impressed. This whole thread came from the idea that the designer of the dragon said the dragon might do something surprising.
It could simply be that the situation to trigger the surprising mechanic never came up, and it's supposed to surprise us in A2 when we fight it ourselves.
Or it could be that the dev thought they really came up with something unique and were wrong. Stop being a dick to people who want to help in the second case.
Azherae
2
Re: Steven's response to secondary archetypes
I don't share that worry. The Rock Paper Scissor system means that 2 Archetypes are strong against 2 others, with clerics and Bards standing on the outside and applauding the slaughter.
So a "meta" of tank-clerics as an example is easily broken by primary Mages or primary Summoners which are strong archetypes against bruiser Archetypes (Tank & Fighter). So other classes facing a "meta" build can just look at the counters of that, build that and break those builds.
Sometimes with enough player skill adjusting the secondary archetype or adjusting the talents on skills or weapon mastery may suffice to break a meta build,
sometimes restricting the resources to get the gear for that build can be enough because it requires a specific set to work
and in very extreme cases it might result in people switching their main character to counter the meta builds.
My point is: There are a lot of systems planned & implemented that were made with the intent to allow for fast (but not free) build adjustments, which will IMO be used to break meta builds before they emerge.
So a "meta" of tank-clerics as an example is easily broken by primary Mages or primary Summoners which are strong archetypes against bruiser Archetypes (Tank & Fighter). So other classes facing a "meta" build can just look at the counters of that, build that and break those builds.
Sometimes with enough player skill adjusting the secondary archetype or adjusting the talents on skills or weapon mastery may suffice to break a meta build,
sometimes restricting the resources to get the gear for that build can be enough because it requires a specific set to work
and in very extreme cases it might result in people switching their main character to counter the meta builds.
My point is: There are a lot of systems planned & implemented that were made with the intent to allow for fast (but not free) build adjustments, which will IMO be used to break meta builds before they emerge.
Kilion
3
Re: Instanced Content Should Not Offer Power Gains
It isn't a case of what Intrepid can and can not do, it is a case what is possible and what is not.
It’s gotta be, “they won’t be able to design a good encounter in the open world that takes precision!!”, you haven’t the faintest clue what Intrepid can cook up.
If I have 2 cups of water, and an enclosed vessal that holds one cup, there is no way I can get those two cups of water in that vessal. It is just not possible - physics does not work that way.
If we assume one cup of that water is PvP, and one cup of that water is PvE, the one cup vessal is the cap of player capability assuming highly skilled, highly coordernated players with the right mic of characters in some of the best gear in the game (not having any of these things just means you have a smaller vessal).
No matter what happens, those two cups of water are still not going to fit in to that one cup vessal. It just doesn't work that way.This made me laugh.Vanilla Molten Core
Vanilla molten core is about the difficulty and quality I expect Ashes raids to be.There are a LOT of games that have tried, and literally every single one has failed.There’s a lot of raids in the MMORPG universe that are bloody difficult and can be open world.
There is not a single example in all of MMORPG gaming of an actual difficult raid encounter that exists in a PvP enabled setting.
Not one example.
I have a sneaking suspicion you’ve never actually done MC.
Just like, I have a sneaking suspicion you just look at YouTube videos and write them off, mostly because through out the years that’s been part of your MO.
There’s no proof of success like there’s no proof of your EQ difficulty.
Another day Noanni is full of shit.
You can think what ever you want.
Fact is, Molten Core (vanilla WoW in general) was designed to appeal to people that didn't know what an MMORPG even was. Blizzards target market for WoW was existing Blizzard game players - specifically Diablo and Warcraft players.
At the time, people did indeed consider MC to be difficult. But that is because it was the first real raid that most of the people that took it on had ever attempted.
Noaani
1