Best Of
Clouds and lighting
After watching the latest live stream introducing the raid on firebrand. Steven started the stream looking up at the sun. BRIGHT. I did however notice a cloud that slowly moved in front of the sun, but the lighting did not seem to change. I was hoping to start a discussion on a minor thing that doesn't NEED to be in the game, but would have a cool atmospheric approach. I would love to see clouds completely block light from the sun and provide shade. Thinking of Mordor from lord of the rings.
Re: What are people's node & biome preferences?
Node : Dunir
Biome : Born underground, suckled from a teat of stone, raised in the dark, the safety of our mountain home, skin made of iron, steel in our bones, to dig and dig makes us free, come on brothers sing with me.
Biome : Born underground, suckled from a teat of stone, raised in the dark, the safety of our mountain home, skin made of iron, steel in our bones, to dig and dig makes us free, come on brothers sing with me.
Lodrig
2
Re: What are people's node & biome preferences?
For me mountain or hilly area since I will be playing as a Dünir dwarf. But whatever city node my guild will try to form as fast as possible will be my home. Plus eventually, I will try to be the owner of a tavern in that node.. Since I can still remember the Tavern/Cantina name my current guild had in SWG back in the day. Those were some fun times in SWG since I was the guild leader for a Wookie clan. The neighbors south are about 500 to 2000 meters from our village is where that cantina I remember fondly. The weird part is after SWG I joined said guild when they moved on to wow when it first started.
Glagnar
2
Re: Steven's response to secondary archetypes
Yep. That has always been in the Ashes design.I really do plan to play one of my Characters - probably my Main - as a Necromancer.
Yes Please. Give me the greenish, or purple'ish, or ghostly blue'ish glowy Magic which a Necromancer should be able to have.
Yes. Please give me my Boney Servants, or Zombies - or whatever else is on the Table as a Summoner, which is different from a probably more Nature/Life-Loving Summoner.
Dygz
2
Re: Instanced Content Should Not Offer Power Gains
Power already exists in instanced PvP and as a direct result of instanced PvP. Clearly if that fundamental gameplay mechanic was a deal breaker for you, you’d already be long gone, so what’s the deal? What are you actually complaining about??
Im going to correct your ignorance on sieges only once. As of now, castle sieges are PvX, the player power comes from one of the three raid bosses (PvE). The political power of entire alliance comes from sieges, but that system isn’t even complete.
Read the wiki a little more carefully if you bothered at all.
And I’ve already voiced my preference for castles being open world way before you showed up on the forums.
Can you start by reading my posts accurately before you harp on someone not reading the wiki? You've misread posts multiple times now which make trying to discuss anything with you frustrating, to put it lightly. (Not helped by your lack of clarity, apparent misunderstanding of the systems as they're designed, along with not knowing what 'instanced' means in the context of Ashes of Creation.)
Castle seiges (which I've never even mentioned anywhere in this thread) are objective-based PvP events, which you ought to know considering you took part in one. The existence of an objective does not negate that it's a PvP event. The only time it's a PvX encounter is the first capture, an I have no doubt it's not going to be remotely considered 'top-end' bosses considering it's designed for the express purpose of being cleared out to promote player politicking.
Also, instanced content is planned there too already.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Castle_siegesThere may be instanced locations within otherwise open-world castle and node sieges, where specific groups can participate in small, short duration objective-based battles that will affect the overall outcome of the siege.[12]
It was previously stated that castle sieges may or may not be (entirely) instanced in the final game.[13]
Alpha-1 castle sieges occurred in an open-world zone that was accessible via a NPC teleporter.[14][15][13][16]
Dungeons being open but the final boss encounters being instanced to allow for more finely-tuned combat encounters falls entirely in line with how the PvP events are being handled. ' Fight all the way here but only one group/guild/whatever can take their shot at the boss.' Open world to a point, and then they can really crank up the difficulty where no zerging of a boss can happen.
The point of instancing pieces of content is so Intrepid can design around a set amount of participants. This is necessary in order to create high-end, highly demanding PvE encounters that only 1% of players will ever clear. They can't design a challenge without knowing how many people will be running around in the combat space. If the answer is "however many want to run in there" then the encounter has to be dumbed down to facilitate a clear in the face of PvP.
It's the same reason Node Seiges are set to be instanced (aka restricted participation), scheduled PvP events during which the node essentially is turned off until it's successfully defended, if it's successfully defended. Restricting non-registered players effectively means the seige happens in its own little world until the event concludes. If they don't have that common-sense restriction, then they'll find node sieges getting extremely chaotic under influence of people 'joining' just to troll objectives while there's nothing that can be done about them.
The only instanced “PvP” event so far were sieges. It was both PvP and PvE simultaneously, the dragons (PvE) dropped the power. Destroying assets is PvE.
Good lord. Well, if nothing else thank you for confirming you don't know the difference between a PvP objective and a PvE encounter. Certainly puts the whole thread into perspective.
I’ve been raiding for years. I know what an encounter is.
Your behavior is the exact reason why I’m short with you, a lot but not all “1%” raiders are actually insufferable. Being given the chance, you’re just as annoying and selfish as they come.
Raiders are PvErs.
Most of the game is PvE. There can never be enough PvE for you.
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.
You won’t run the risk of something like Vanilla Molten Core in an open setting.
Even though they could literally build something similar to open world MC, you just might get gated from the content.
There’s a lot of raids in the MMORPG universe that are bloody difficult and can be open world.
Solvryn
1
Re: PvE difficulty or a lack thereof
I'm not sure where people think this dragon raid was easy. They had a Cleric (Steven) set to God mode and resed people almost none stop. They would have failed other wise.
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »So you don't understand how logic works, and you don't understand what an assumption is.
Like when I said Solo players will end up being lower level then people in guilds. That was just a baseless assumption. No logic involved there?
Not getting baited by that. Also, not citing specific assumptions because your 10 page essay is chock full of em.
Besides, you're obviously a solo player who doesn't want to PvP, who wants all content instanced, deserves participation trophies, and is just here to stir shit up about a game of which you are not the target audience. Oh look, I made an assumption.
It's pretty simple. Game isn't designed for solo players. Game is designed for group play. Game won't be for everyone. Logic would dictate that you find another game.
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
They will get something, but not the best tier gear/items, but one/two/whatever tiers below.AirborneBerserker wrote: »
That, in AoC, will be the consequence of being no part of an entire group/guild.
Again, I can see all your points, I‘ve been playing long enough and got the experience of all hype and drama of a lot of MMos out there. AoC will be a very group based MMO, it makes no sense that you or me dislike that, but, to arrange with it and give it a try.
If it will be a 12h a day MMO with 95% group and no content for afterwork and casual gamers, than I will leave it to the elitist players that have all the time in the world and thats it. But I will figure this out by myself and I will decide than, wheter its a game for me or not.
And, if its a game that will not respect the time of the average players / the mass than it will fail, as all those games did in the past. This will not work or only for a small group of players. If there is no meaningful content if you only login for 1-2h every day oder every second day, than AoC will quite fast only have a very small playerbase - the death for player created environments (nodes, caravans, sieges, …).
Chaliux
4
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Sounds like we as the community NEED to do a better job helping new people get acclimated into the game as it is vs begging to make the game something it is not intended to be.
Most gear is supposed to be crafted. Nobody can do all the crafting on a single toon. We will need to interact with others to get the materials (raw and processed) to build gear. So even crafting requires interaction with others.
All of this stuff is why many of us are here. We have no desire to go play something that allows a single player to do everything on a single character.
Most gear is supposed to be crafted. Nobody can do all the crafting on a single toon. We will need to interact with others to get the materials (raw and processed) to build gear. So even crafting requires interaction with others.
All of this stuff is why many of us are here. We have no desire to go play something that allows a single player to do everything on a single character.
Looking back on Rangers. (Rangers being weapon locked)
I know we're well past the ranger showcase but as more and more classes have come out, it's become more and more apparent to me that rangers as they currently exist really feel counterintuitive to Ashes of Creation's design and I think they miss out on the class fantasy.
To Clarify, currently rangers feel like "bow-the class" as opposed to a more hunter/nature aesthetic. Which is fine if Ashes of Creation had classes locked to a weapon... but they don't. I've been on a trend of looking for unique combinations in Ashes of creation recently to see how they might work, 2h sword wielding mage (which they even showcased in a livestream!), bow mage, PI members have gone to talk about battle clerics with maces and heavy armor instead of wands, and all of the different weapon varieties each class can carry. there are only 3 examples I can really think of that fly in the face of this incredible diversity. Everything else besides these 3 examples is truly diverse and unique and allows the user to do whatever kind of stuff they want to do.
1st, the fighter as a whole feels pretty locked into melee weapons. There are several skills that i simply cannot picture working with ranged weapons. Like how would a spellbook work with Whirlwind? for example. But in this example, fighters still have a large range available to them. If we look at the planned weapons we can see that "melee" weapons would incorporate:
- Axes - 1h/2h
- Clubs
- Daggers
- Hammers
- Lances
- Maces - 1h/2h
- Polearms/Halberds
- Spears - 1h/2h
- Swords - 1h/2h
Fighters will still have plenty of options to them to really customize and diversify their class to make fighters feel unique, and none of the fighter skills feel required to have any specific of these. Plus I'm not sure that whirlwind wouldn't work with a wand or a scepter.
2nd, the tank has 1 skill that is weapon locked and that is shield assault. that's it.
Rangers in comparison to these two have 7 skill specifically locked to bow(Weapon bow mastery, Snipe shot+upgrades, the 3 Imbued Ammo techniques, Call of the wind (no idea why this requires the bow, but it does per the wiki), Air strike) (The imbued ammo techniques don't actually specify bow as a requirement but do say "When the target is hit by your bow" in the description.)
And then have 4 more skills that are clearly bow and arrow themed, use arrows in the animations, and/or list bows and arrows in the description of the skill. (Thundering shot, Scatter shot and it's variants, Barrage, Raining Death, and you count the 3 imbued ammo techniques here if you didn't count them above),
For a total of 11! of the rangers techniques being clearly themed for 1 weapon type and that alone. In fact it would have been easier to tell you all the things the rangers can do that aren't bow and arrow themed! which is the hunts and marks (which i love and feel very thematic), the bear trap, disengage, camouflage, and the vine field. 11 skills feels crazy in comparison to all of the other classes for weapon locking.
Despite this I think some skills can be reflavored/reworked slightly to work with any weapon, Barrage, call of the wind, airstrike, thundering shot, the imbued ammo, headshot and honestly Snipe as a targeted charge up dash for melee weapons would be awesome. All of these could easily work with melee weapons let alone other ranged weapon options. A ranger with a staff cosplaying as a druid sounds awesome! and hunting with a spear is an incredibly common depiction.
I think one of Ashes of Creations biggest draws is the customization of build crafting and building something that feels unique and fits your own playstyle/personal vision for a class. One of the biggest components of that is the ability to use any weapon you want with any class, and in it's current iteration Ranger does not allow for that freedom, and currently feels more like a class dedicated to a specific weapon than anything else. This feels like a miss from intrepid given how well they've crafted everything else and how cool the hunter/nature fantasy of the ranger class feels.
TL:DR - I think the ranger class is more of the "bow and arrow" class, and having a class so rigidly attached to one specific weapon feels counter to the general design stance that they have taken of "Any class can use any weapon"
Disclaimer - I know ashes of creation is still in alpha! the game isn't even close to release yet and several things are still a work in progress! Ranger isn't done yet, I get it! I'm more hoping that this post and subsequent discussion can help guide intrepid to getting the ranger into a better overall place and get the same sort of customization that all of the other classes get to love and enjoy. This isn't coming out of hatred or anything like that for the ranger, actually quite the opposite as someone who loves the ranger in d&d and just want it to be as free as everything else.
Edit: forgot to include camouflage under the things Rangers can do without a bow, now fixed, and is a very hunter/naturey thing i like about ranger. Originally forgot to include it cause it's not directly on the skill tree on the wiki.
To Clarify, currently rangers feel like "bow-the class" as opposed to a more hunter/nature aesthetic. Which is fine if Ashes of Creation had classes locked to a weapon... but they don't. I've been on a trend of looking for unique combinations in Ashes of creation recently to see how they might work, 2h sword wielding mage (which they even showcased in a livestream!), bow mage, PI members have gone to talk about battle clerics with maces and heavy armor instead of wands, and all of the different weapon varieties each class can carry. there are only 3 examples I can really think of that fly in the face of this incredible diversity. Everything else besides these 3 examples is truly diverse and unique and allows the user to do whatever kind of stuff they want to do.
1st, the fighter as a whole feels pretty locked into melee weapons. There are several skills that i simply cannot picture working with ranged weapons. Like how would a spellbook work with Whirlwind? for example. But in this example, fighters still have a large range available to them. If we look at the planned weapons we can see that "melee" weapons would incorporate:
- Axes - 1h/2h
- Clubs
- Daggers
- Hammers
- Lances
- Maces - 1h/2h
- Polearms/Halberds
- Spears - 1h/2h
- Swords - 1h/2h
Fighters will still have plenty of options to them to really customize and diversify their class to make fighters feel unique, and none of the fighter skills feel required to have any specific of these. Plus I'm not sure that whirlwind wouldn't work with a wand or a scepter.
2nd, the tank has 1 skill that is weapon locked and that is shield assault. that's it.
Rangers in comparison to these two have 7 skill specifically locked to bow(Weapon bow mastery, Snipe shot+upgrades, the 3 Imbued Ammo techniques, Call of the wind (no idea why this requires the bow, but it does per the wiki), Air strike) (The imbued ammo techniques don't actually specify bow as a requirement but do say "When the target is hit by your bow" in the description.)
And then have 4 more skills that are clearly bow and arrow themed, use arrows in the animations, and/or list bows and arrows in the description of the skill. (Thundering shot, Scatter shot and it's variants, Barrage, Raining Death, and you count the 3 imbued ammo techniques here if you didn't count them above),
For a total of 11! of the rangers techniques being clearly themed for 1 weapon type and that alone. In fact it would have been easier to tell you all the things the rangers can do that aren't bow and arrow themed! which is the hunts and marks (which i love and feel very thematic), the bear trap, disengage, camouflage, and the vine field. 11 skills feels crazy in comparison to all of the other classes for weapon locking.
Despite this I think some skills can be reflavored/reworked slightly to work with any weapon, Barrage, call of the wind, airstrike, thundering shot, the imbued ammo, headshot and honestly Snipe as a targeted charge up dash for melee weapons would be awesome. All of these could easily work with melee weapons let alone other ranged weapon options. A ranger with a staff cosplaying as a druid sounds awesome! and hunting with a spear is an incredibly common depiction.
I think one of Ashes of Creations biggest draws is the customization of build crafting and building something that feels unique and fits your own playstyle/personal vision for a class. One of the biggest components of that is the ability to use any weapon you want with any class, and in it's current iteration Ranger does not allow for that freedom, and currently feels more like a class dedicated to a specific weapon than anything else. This feels like a miss from intrepid given how well they've crafted everything else and how cool the hunter/nature fantasy of the ranger class feels.
TL:DR - I think the ranger class is more of the "bow and arrow" class, and having a class so rigidly attached to one specific weapon feels counter to the general design stance that they have taken of "Any class can use any weapon"
Disclaimer - I know ashes of creation is still in alpha! the game isn't even close to release yet and several things are still a work in progress! Ranger isn't done yet, I get it! I'm more hoping that this post and subsequent discussion can help guide intrepid to getting the ranger into a better overall place and get the same sort of customization that all of the other classes get to love and enjoy. This isn't coming out of hatred or anything like that for the ranger, actually quite the opposite as someone who loves the ranger in d&d and just want it to be as free as everything else.
Edit: forgot to include camouflage under the things Rangers can do without a bow, now fixed, and is a very hunter/naturey thing i like about ranger. Originally forgot to include it cause it's not directly on the skill tree on the wiki.
Adestra
1