Best Of
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
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 soloplay themepark LFG lobby.
Re: List of reasons to allow Shadow computers
Yeah, people got a bit derailed on the whole "you poor sucka!" part. Doubt you will get Intrepid to authorize any VM machines to run their product. While people can claim only the best intentions, in many cases they are used by those who cheat to avoid soft and hardware bans. And there are other security issues. While this response from their own developers is two years old. I did find it telling that it was basically, "Yeah, sucks to be you, but we gonna try to do better later."
Re: Why did you stop to play an MMO you once loved?
Mostly for three main reasons :
1. Pay 2 Win
2. Lack of content
3. Repetitive content
1. Pay 2 Win
2. Lack of content
3. Repetitive content
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
This looked like an interesting topic from the title.
With a quick skim, it's way too long with too many unrelated details, making it hard to follow the main point. Further posts also seem to diverge from what I expected based on the title.
Is there a problem for solo players or is there some other problem?
With a quick skim, it's way too long with too many unrelated details, making it hard to follow the main point. Further posts also seem to diverge from what I expected based on the title.
Is there a problem for solo players or is there some other problem?
akabear
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »AirborneBerserker wrote: »NoaaniAirborneBerserker wrote: »But for the sake of argument let's assume that 100% of people will be in guilds at launch. And lets assume that 5 million people (which would be a wildly high number) buy the game on or before launch. And lets assume the game runs for 10 years which means for 9.5 years people will be joining the game after the majority of people are max level. What percentage of players do you think that 9.5 years of growth amount to?
In other words do you think in 9.5 years you would get another 5 million people playing the game and if so that would be 50% of the player base being solo players for most if not all of their leveling experience.
When you basically type "assumption, assumption, assumption, question", you kind of can't expect the question to be taken seriously.
My actual answer to your question is that I do not expect Ashes to be live for 10 years, so your question isn't something that I can answer. If you rephrase it in a way where you aren't making layered assumptions leading in to a question, I could attempt to answer it. However, in the above form, it is not a question that can be answered.
I will also point out that your rephrasing of the question in your post above is actually a different question. In that post, you are only talking about people playing during their leveling up process. MMORPG's that have published play time statistics all have around 90% of all online time in their game being on characters at the current level cap, so the leveling process only makes up 10% of total play time - meaning even if 50% of players leveling up were unguilded, that only makes on 5% of total play time for the game as a whole.
Now it's your turn to tell me the games you were talking about where 50%+ players play the game unguilded.
Not start the game unguilded, where 50%+ are unguilded.
Why wont the game last that long? EverQuest is still running and its been 25 years since that game launched.
EQ is, sure. But then, EQ is a PvE focused MMORPG.
PvP focused MMORPG's have a long history of, well, not lasting as long.
If you look at the numbers required to maintain a single server in Ashes with it's current design (as far as we understand it), it would need to be in the top three most popular PvP focused MMORPG's in order to maintain a single server. A game can't maintain that for a prolonged period of time.
Either way, you have a question to rephrase if you want an answer, and an answer to a question to provide.
Noaani
1
Re: Contest for Parent Node
So far the only thing that I could see acting as a counterbalance is just putting good mobs everywhere Otherwise I'm not sure how those nodes would attract enough players to stay in them to outwheigh the optimal grinding of hardcore guilds.Shouldn't that then at least also be counteracted by giving those nodes that suffer from this disadvantage a different incentive structure advantages before they reach level 3, so the playing field is even from the start?
Especially in the context of all the nodes outside the immediate cirles around starting gates. Normal/casual players won't really care about node benefits, types or trinkets. They'll just start playing the game and will naturally spill out of the gates and devour everything they see like locusts.
But guilds will 100% have precise node targets, run there from the start and lvl them up asap. The bigger the guild - the faster the lvls. And this then spill over into this part of the discussion\/
I believe that the chance of nodes not being leveled because of mobs low because the avalanche begins exactly from nodes being lvled due to mobs. And you can't outpace the avalanche once it starts due to how the system itself works.How can you know that? What I meant there was a hypothetical patched state of the game where something like an economy node without major dungeons (let's say for the sake of argument that's something that exists in the current map design) gets boosted xp gain from trading and similar imperial actions. We couldn't yet know what the chance of that node surpassing a PvE-heavy surrounding node would be, because we wouldn't know how high that node XP boost would be.
Guilds run out far from the gates to start leveling precise nodes. While unorganized players stumble around the gates, the guild-leveled nodes lock out at least the closest nodes to them, which will already create a small barrier around them. By the time general population gets to the guild-based nodes, they'll be of a higher lvl than the lvl0 nodes. This means that they'll try looking for higher lvl mobs, which would be situated in the guild-based nodes. This then snowballs those nodes into higher and higher lvls.
Right now this is how I foresee this system functioning. This assumption is based purely on my take on the system and expectations of how it works, as presented so far. Getting better gear early to allow yourself to lvl up faster seems like a more optimal action than trying to level up a node of some particular type, which is why I believe that hardcore guilds would go for mob locations more than for specific nodes (though some definitely will go for nodes).
And once that snowball starts (both in node lvls and in guild gearing) - it's reaaal hard to stop it. Especially considering that no sieges will be happening for the first few months (cause lockout is longer than node leveling) and wars will be too pricey/cumbersome for any group of people that are trying to push their progress to the limit.
Unorganized players usually take the path of least resistance, which means that "I am lvl20 so I want lvl20 mobs and this node has them" will prevail over "I am lvl20, but if I stay in this node there's a chance that it lvls up and gives me lvl20 mobs, so I'm fine with grinding lvl10 mobs for a while". This then means that guilds will get boosted by unguilded people.
If I'm wrong - cool, great even. But so far I don't really see how I could be. It'd be interesting to try and test this in A2, but we'd need a fresh wipe and huundreds of people all working towards this precise test. Would be cool if Intrepid organized this test themselves, but I'm sure they'll be preoccupied with, you know, building the rest of the game, rather than worrying about minute details like this
Ludullu
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
This looked like an interesting topic from the title.
With a quick skim, it's way too long with too many unrelated details, making it hard to follow the main point. Further posts also seem to diverge from what I expected based on the title.
Is there a problem for solo players or is there some other problem?
A tldr: Solo players are not the intended audience for Ashes and as such will be disadvantaged in PvE and PvP. True statement.
Then they claimed half of the entire MMO population is solo players and that Ashes would fail due to a lack of solo-rewarding content.
Caeryl
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
The whole of AOC is centered around:
interdependence
Mutual dependence.
The condition of being interdependent.
A reciprocal relation between interdependent entities (objects or individuals or groups).
Everything from the Archetypes to crafting is all centered around interdependence.
That is the reason I got my wallet out for kickstarter. Steven's vision for for this project to be centered on groups and group play.
With ever so many many pretender MMO's why make another?
interdependence
Mutual dependence.
The condition of being interdependent.
A reciprocal relation between interdependent entities (objects or individuals or groups).
Everything from the Archetypes to crafting is all centered around interdependence.
That is the reason I got my wallet out for kickstarter. Steven's vision for for this project to be centered on groups and group play.
With ever so many many pretender MMO's why make another?
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Can't really "get behind everyone else" in Ashes.But what about those who join later, who are inevitably going to be behind everyone else? Who do they group up with? The pool of similar players, that are at a similar stage of the game will be smaller and smaller.
This is why a big part of the game needs to be "solo" friendly.
Ashes is a dynamic game, rather than a static game.
The world changes as Nodes rise and fall.
Newbies will find each other near the Portals. But, again, you do not have to mechanically join a Group to fight alongside other players - regardless of their Levels.
Dygz
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
I don't care a whit about your unsupported claim that Soloers wil have worse gear. Especially since, even if it were a valid claim, it shouldn't matter if you're playing Solo.AirborneBerserker wrote: »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.
Why would the Corruption system be weakening Soloers?? The Corruption system weakens PKers.
A player who repeatedly disrupts other players' gameplay is a Griefer. Doesn't really matter how they are griefing. Corruption is irrelevant with regard to whether someone is Griefer.
Dygz
1