Best Of
Re: Resurrection during combat
Yes, because that "showcase" had an aspect of reality to it...In the Firebrand showcase. We saw more than 40 resurrects. and in the end they managed to kill it. And without those resurrects they would have failed. So i disagree.
If a raid leader suggested that as a method to kill a boss, that raid leader would be looking for a new raid.
Noaani
1
Re: Resurrection during combat
Yeah, if you want to use them all up.so in 40 man raid, if you have 5 clerics (1 for every 8 players). You get: 40 res from scrolls + 40 res from the 5 clerics mass resurrect + 5 resurrects every 5 mins.
So you want to tell me 90-100 resurrects in 1 fight is acceptable for 40 players?
I'm not sure why you would, as if you are needing that many, clearly you are doing something wrong.
Having access to that amount of resurrection capacity doesn't mean you want to use it all, nor that you should use it all. If you use all of those resurrections because you needed to use them all, you are still going to fail at killing the encounter - so you are only wasting your own time and resources by doing so.
In this situation, it doesn't even matter if this is PvE or PvP, if you use that amount of resurrection resources, you've lost. More resurrection resources used just means you lost even more.
From a PvP perspective, thrashing a rival guild and watching them resurrect mid fight in order to attempt to keep things going - but thrashing them anyway is just one of lifes little joys.
Noaani
4
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »TL:DR
Ashes encounters are designed for an 8-person group with one of each Primary Archetype.
Additionally, Stevens dream is to have massive battles of 250 v 250 PvP or 500 v 500 PvP. Even higher if they can keep the Realms stable.
That being said, players don't have to mechanically accept an invite to a Group in order to participate in Caravan PvP, Node Sieges or Node Wars. Nor to participate in World Boss battles or Dungeons.
What is stopping a Solo player from griefing a Group?
I'm going to be equally annoyed at a Solo player who repeatedly disrupts my playtime with unwanted PvP as I would be a Group who does so. Doesn't matter if my Group can kill the Solo griefer more quickly than we can kill a Group of griefers.
You didn't read the post, because if you had you would know that a solo player will have worse gear, and be lower level, and even if they do some how get gear AND are higher level the corruption system will probably weaken them enough to make sure the last person kills them. And even if they can't kill him and they all die, that's not griefing that's getting ganked, and the amount of corruption will likely force them to leave. Groups will not have that problem.
I disagree that a 100% solo player will have worse gear. you might not be able to farm the gear yourself, but you can always farm something else and buy the gear, even if it takes a little while. gear isn't bound here.
Depraved
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »TheDarkSorcerer wrote: »OP. I'm sure your thread is wonderfully written, but I am not reading a thread the size of a Harry Potter book. Gotta summarize your thoughts some
I mean the quickest i could give you is making solo players work that hard to get to max level and not give them an end game system to play with is a bit much. At most 20% of what end game offers but i don't know what that would entail at this point.
Hate to break it to you, but that 20% of instanced content is at the end of PvX areas and are for groups, not for lone wolves.
The best you can hope for is if there end up being 1v1 arenas, which thus far we’ve only heard of 3v3 and up.
Caeryl
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »bloodprophet wrote: »AirborneBerserker wrote: »The way for a group-focused game to appeal to new players is to make the group-focused gameplay fun, not to offer more avenues to succeed without other players/guilds.AirborneBerserker wrote: »And I am punished with no response? =PAirborneBerserker wrote: »Implying what?AirborneBerserker wrote: »Well this is progress of a sort.Not every player who has a preference for solo gameplay is as much of a sour grape as you.AirborneBerserker wrote: »
Many of those 70% might enjoy the playstyle of WoW, or whatever other solo-friendly MMO, for now, because it's what has worked so far - but would be perfectly willing to adjust their expectations and behaviours in order to fit into a game where the priorities and demands are different, and change the way they play, if they find that this new gameplay loop is also enjoyable.
As for the rest, yes.
Yes, it is a fantastic idea to tell them to pass on this game.
All the reasons why WoW is such a boring soulless themepark filled with dailies and grind quests and arenas instead of anything of substance can be traced back to its attempt of appealing to everyone:
Where comfort and convenience are cranked up to the max.
And where communication and finding people whose playstyles you agree with is entirely optional, and grouping is streamlined without any social interaction required.
Ashes doesn't make this mistake.
Ashes is for players who are willing to combine PvP and PvE challenges,
who are willing to compete for high rewards at high risks and accept the setback when other players beat them to the objective,
and who care about building a world where their contribution alters the way the world looks, and what happens in it.
The rest can go play WoW, FFXIV and ESO, instead of disappointing themselves with something that wasn't made to appeal to their demands for a solo play theme park LFG lobby.
You didn't insult me or put words in my mouth. Which most of the posters do.
There isn't much to respond to. I agree with most of the post.
But I would caution you that if you don't create a way for new players to join the community then you only have empty servers to look forward to.
No it's not. If you want someone to change what there accustomed to you have to do it slowly, if the change is too fast then people will resist the change. People like what they like. If however what you do is create systems that create positive interactions between solo players and guilds that allows them to build up a reputation with each other so the guild knows they are getting a person they want in their guild and the person knows it's the kind of guild they want to be in. That is how, don't force them, convert them.
Or
Do something similar to what GW1 did.
Everyone started solo. Then there was a 2 player quest. That moved into a small group skirmish (don't remember if it was 2v2 or 4v4). Then they moved players into larger groups organically.
This might have been the best mechanism in the game. The rest wasn't terrible but it helped new players acclimate to larger groups as they played the main story.
No because again this forces people to group, and you don't want to do that.
No!
YOU don't want that. The majority of us do
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »bloodprophet wrote: »AirborneBerserker wrote: »The way for a group-focused game to appeal to new players is to make the group-focused gameplay fun, not to offer more avenues to succeed without other players/guilds.AirborneBerserker wrote: »And I am punished with no response? =PAirborneBerserker wrote: »Implying what?AirborneBerserker wrote: »Well this is progress of a sort.Not every player who has a preference for solo gameplay is as much of a sour grape as you.AirborneBerserker wrote: »
Many of those 70% might enjoy the playstyle of WoW, or whatever other solo-friendly MMO, for now, because it's what has worked so far - but would be perfectly willing to adjust their expectations and behaviours in order to fit into a game where the priorities and demands are different, and change the way they play, if they find that this new gameplay loop is also enjoyable.
As for the rest, yes.
Yes, it is a fantastic idea to tell them to pass on this game.
All the reasons why WoW is such a boring soulless themepark filled with dailies and grind quests and arenas instead of anything of substance can be traced back to its attempt of appealing to everyone:
Where comfort and convenience are cranked up to the max.
And where communication and finding people whose playstyles you agree with is entirely optional, and grouping is streamlined without any social interaction required.
Ashes doesn't make this mistake.
Ashes is for players who are willing to combine PvP and PvE challenges,
who are willing to compete for high rewards at high risks and accept the setback when other players beat them to the objective,
and who care about building a world where their contribution alters the way the world looks, and what happens in it.
The rest can go play WoW, FFXIV and ESO, instead of disappointing themselves with something that wasn't made to appeal to their demands for a solo play theme park LFG lobby.
You didn't insult me or put words in my mouth. Which most of the posters do.
There isn't much to respond to. I agree with most of the post.
But I would caution you that if you don't create a way for new players to join the community then you only have empty servers to look forward to.
No it's not. If you want someone to change what there accustomed to you have to do it slowly, if the change is too fast then people will resist the change. People like what they like. If however what you do is create systems that create positive interactions between solo players and guilds that allows them to build up a reputation with each other so the guild knows they are getting a person they want in their guild and the person knows it's the kind of guild they want to be in. That is how, don't force them, convert them.
Or
Do something similar to what GW1 did.
Everyone started solo. Then there was a 2 player quest. That moved into a small group skirmish (don't remember if it was 2v2 or 4v4). Then they moved players into larger groups organically.
This might have been the best mechanism in the game. The rest wasn't terrible but it helped new players acclimate to larger groups as they played the main story.
No because again this forces people to group, and you don't want to do that.
At this point you need to realize that Ashes fundamentally not for players like you who want to run it solo. You’ll need a group for efficient crafting, you’ll need one for raiding, for PvPing, and even for some areas of grinding.
To ask for solo-friendly content is to ask for a different game.
Make some friends and start a little guild or something, but you can’t be successful in a MMO on your own. That’s by design and how it should be.
Caeryl
2
Re: Free to play for 3- or 5-days every so often
No, its an invite to gold spammers and other unwanted shenanigans
Re: Free to play for 3- or 5-days every so often
Night Wings wrote: »Even better just make a Server that only free trial players can play on, but once that trials is up they have to pay a subscription fee and remake their character on a subscription server and the stuff they had in the trial server is lost, but they get the basic gear from that level and starting gold for that level. Honestly might be better just to boost that character they make to 10 regardless what level they were on trial server, because every MMO I've ever played 1-10 is always the tutorial phase
This way ^ bots cant bother actual subscription players and they wont be able to transfer anything, because its a new character.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ just my two cents on how I would approach this.
I'm completely against anything that lets bots or gold sellers get their foot in the door. As unpractical as the separate server would be for dev cost wise, I do agree that if some sort of free to play trial period is set up then restricting it to it's own private server would in my opinion be the best way. That would help curb the bots and gold sellers getting easy access to main servers as well as help to reduce people joining in for a short time locking down a character name then buggering off never to be seen again. At least then the trial servers could be wiped every time a trial period ends.
Re: Loot System Changes
While there may not be any direct consequences with bad behavior regarding looting, there will certainly be consequences on your reputation on the server, which seems to be Intrepid's goal in making these decisions. They want there to be ways to generate drama and conflict inside guilds and parties which in turn leads to a server that feels more alive.
As for the "every participant deserves loot", I'm not the biggest fan. Perhaps some common mats would be fine, but for the actual good loot you go to raids for, nah.
Thank you for posting this. I wasn't aware it was their goal to "generate drama and conflict inside guilds and parties". If that is their goal, better for them to go with the old school loot systems, because there will be drama lol.
Yeah, Ashes seems to rely on social interaction quite a bit, so they're probably trying to promote any interaction between players. Stuff like fully randomized looting might diminish that.