Best Of
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
idea
Both of the suggested images are lacking in clarity
1 doesn't tell you anything at all about the location or impact of the AoEs. 2 doesn't have visuals that match the damage source.
Color language in MMOs is fairly universal. Green is good, yellow is a warning notice, and red is active damage. Other colors tend to translate more loosely with a general 'vivid = dangerous'.
Making the 'bad ground' a blue wave texture just causes visual confusion, because the soft shapes tell players it's neutral or harmless, and the color echoes that assumption (it's literally mimicking water, the most neutral thing in the world). It would be shocking to walk into something with that effect and start taking damage. If there wasn't a caption, I think most people would assume that's a cleansing area where you go to cleanse that AoE tracking under the character's feet.
At least with those many circles, I know what each one is doing. Green, gold, and blue are safe to stand in. Red is active damage and orange is an ability about to land.
Caeryl
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »I don't understand what any of that has to do with growing the game, but...AirborneBerserker 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?
I expect the vast majority of Ashes players will belong to a Guild.
People in Guilds still Adventure Solo, at least sometimes, rather than only Adventuring in a Group.
I'm not expecting Ashes to have better numbers than Albion.
The longer Ashes takes to release, the fewer people will play it. Because there will be plenty of other games to play. Especially for PvEers and Casual-Challenge players and Casual-Time players... and Soloers (people who mostly Adventure without joining a Group).
Because the people coming into the game 6+ months after launch will have a much harder time finding a group. Which means they will spend most if not all of their time leveling solo. Which I would define as something that would make them a solo player even if temporarily.
And it's interesting you chose Albion since its a prime example of what I'm talking about. Launch number 1300, 1 year in 233, add a bunch of casual friendly stuff go free to play. The casual players are carrying that game.
I'm not that invested in this conversation. I don't play albion but i had a successful branch of my guild that was playing it and it was very group oriented.
https://massivelyop.com/2024/05/14/albion-online-has-broken-its-population-records-again-with-358k-concurrent-players/
Mag7spy
4
Re: Vassal resentment
scottstone7 wrote: »I was just looking over the original kickstarter for something else and found that rebellion IS supported by the original Kickstarter. Just saying.But change for change’s sake means nothing without consequence. That means that these changes and these choices must have repercussions, they must be *felt* throughout the rest of the world. It means that when a player makes a choice in a quest, that choice can’t be undone. It means that when that volcano erupts and destroys a city, the landscape is forever altered. It means that when a tyrant makes life difficult for his citizens, his citizens can rise up against him. Players have choices to make, those choices lead to change, and that change has consequence. Day to day, server to server, the world will be in flux, and history will remain where it always should, in the hands of the player.
you can raise up by leaving and joining another node to attack them, yes.
Mag7spy
1
Re: Vassal resentment
My proposal is as follows.
Nodes maxmum development tier is limited by the number of nodes in their vassal network, including itself. Thus a vassals vassal is just as good as a direct vassal. Direct vassals are limited to no more then 2 or 3, possibly varrying by a nodes development level.
Thus to develop a node must aquire and retain vassals. To reach the Metropolis level it would probably require 10-12 vassal nodes as thats roughtly 85/6 with allowance for some isolated nodes. Likewise maximum nodes in a network should be capped, 15 to 16 seems resonable about the level where their 6th Metropolis starts to get squeezed out. Vassals can be of equal tier but never higher at time of aquisition.
Tier 6 needs 11 nodes (thus 10 vassls)
Tier 5 needs 7 nodes (thus 6 vassals)
Tier 4 needs 4 nodes (thus 3 vassals)
Tier 3 needs 2 nodes (thus 1 vassal)
Tier 2 needs 1 node (which is itself)
Tier 1 needs 1 node (which is itself)
Gaining vassals can be done by conquest or diplomacy. Diplomacy offers the potential for negotiating taxes and benifits and vassal and patron can update this relationship by mutual agreement of new terms after vassalization. Conqcoured vassals on the other hand get a standardized rate of taxes and benifits. Vassals gained diplomaticaly can rebel and fight for independence but must clear a high threshold, being no more then 1 tier development below the patron node, paying a large sum and probably having to be at full experience. Nodes vassalized by conquest get reduced costs and waving of prerequisites to rebel, but if a node that was concoured ever signs a formalized vassal contract with its patron then its concquored status is removed and it is treated like a diplomatically aquired node. Conversly a Patron can unilaterally change the vassal contract but this gives the vassal node the concqoured status and acompanying reduced rebellion costs. In the event any war of independence is lost the vassal has its exp wiped and it and its vassals all the way down are unable to rebel for a period of time.
If a patron node losses enough vassals to cause it to drop below the minimum needed to support its development level then it begins a timed degradation process. If it dosn't aquire new vassals (either direct or through its vassals gaining vassals) then the development drops 1 tier, if it is still under vassalized the process and time period repeat. If this comes as the result of a major vassal the old vassal may end up aquireing the former patron is it's vassal, basically flipping the script on them. Wars to aquire vassals can be conducted on nodes that are already vassals in which causes their patron to automatically be a defender. If the taken vassal themselves has vassals the whle vassal tree is transfered which can cause massive re-alignments and the fall of previous hegemons. Complete wiping of nodes is no longer possible in one event, a node only gets knocked down 1 development level as a result of a node seige which it can rebuild, the loss of vassals is the more serious threat as it devolves a node and leaves it capped.
This system gives incentives for patron nodes to engage in cut throat diplomacy and warmaking for vassals, and to then keep vassals fearfull and or happy, protect them from poaching by other nodes while encouraging them to make their own expansionary moves. As well as giving everyone incentive to grow and 'pad' their vassal count from a supply that is just a little too tight Kingdoms rise and fall more gradually and never go strait back to zero, but can be brought to ruin with repeated losses. This should allow for a more interesting political churn.
Naa i prefer what AoC is already doing it will already have enough politics going on. 1001 people will all say to change systems constantly as everyone always has different ideas to the point you won't ever have a game.
These ideas to overcomplicate a system just to make it difficult to complain about being a vassal is silly and would just lead to a worse game no one can follow what is even going on. Like people out here trying to add 5 steps that aren't needed to make it as difficult as possible to try to avoid being a vassal.
Get xp for you node, build it up, and pvp other nodes make it clear as possible to not overcomplicate the game. Do that and your node will level up while slowing down your competition.
Long story short you could add 10 steps / rules to anything and make things super complex. That doesn't make the game any more fun or interesting. You just end up bogging down the overall experience with elements that are not needed.
Mag7spy
1
Re: 📝 Dev Discussion #67 - AoE Form and Function 💣
I see two types of AOE abilities: "one time" and "persistent". One time AOE abilities are cast, they deal some damage and that is it. Persistent ones create a zone where damage is dealt each tick. I think that the one time aoe skills are completely fine for PVP as they serve the important role of discouraging enemies from clumping up and turtling up with aoe healing.
Persistent AOE on the other hand can be very dangerous in PVP as it doesn't just deal damage, it also serves as area denial. I played a few games (4Story was the worst offender) where persistent AOE was accessible to way too many meta classes so players could create an absolutely insane killing ground where nobody could go. Due to this fights devolved into WW1 style tug of war which is just boring when it happens every single time.
In Crowfall AOE abilities were limited in their maximum number of targets so they wouldn't be too powerful against large groups of players. The problem was that the optimal strategy against there skills was to clump up even more to spread the damage out through the entire raid instead of the abilities consistently hitting their intended amount of targets
And of course there is the problem with visual clarity as in large scale battles there are going to be tons of people casting tons of spells at the same time and coordinated groups are gonna choose a single place to nuke and obliterate everybody standing there. And you really don't want that to cause a flashbang.
Persistent AOE on the other hand can be very dangerous in PVP as it doesn't just deal damage, it also serves as area denial. I played a few games (4Story was the worst offender) where persistent AOE was accessible to way too many meta classes so players could create an absolutely insane killing ground where nobody could go. Due to this fights devolved into WW1 style tug of war which is just boring when it happens every single time.
In Crowfall AOE abilities were limited in their maximum number of targets so they wouldn't be too powerful against large groups of players. The problem was that the optimal strategy against there skills was to clump up even more to spread the damage out through the entire raid instead of the abilities consistently hitting their intended amount of targets
And of course there is the problem with visual clarity as in large scale battles there are going to be tons of people casting tons of spells at the same time and coordinated groups are gonna choose a single place to nuke and obliterate everybody standing there. And you really don't want that to cause a flashbang.
Idefix55
2
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
I know... For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
But regarding the boss lacking mechanics that require raid-coordination rather than single-player-skill only, I really think there is a simple solution, so please hear me out.
This will lead to an encounter where an uncoordinated raid will simply be grilled by him.
The players have to coordinate where the largest group of players is bulking together and which players that are. And they might even have to change that setup infight, wenn some of them die or already used their necessary cooldowns.
But regarding the boss lacking mechanics that require raid-coordination rather than single-player-skill only, I really think there is a simple solution, so please hear me out.
- Firebreath should (as it already does, if I understood correctly) target the direction where it will hit most characters
- Change Firebreath that it is only dodgeable by extraordinary fast/mobile characters or someone using big cooldowns (dash-skills, sprint-potions, etc.)
- Change Firebreath that it is only survivable by extraordinary tanky characters or someone using big cooldowns (tank-skills, fireprotection-potions, etc.)
This will lead to an encounter where an uncoordinated raid will simply be grilled by him.
The players have to coordinate where the largest group of players is bulking together and which players that are. And they might even have to change that setup infight, wenn some of them die or already used their necessary cooldowns.
Yulivee
1
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
I noticed that it was no stat dempening(lower health and mana) upon deaths druing raid. Does this mechanic still exist in-game? Or it doesn't apply when priest rez you?
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
Another observation in regards to the loot: This is a leveling dragon that's not dropping any endgame gear. It doesn't drop enough loot to make it a good option for players who are just leveling. I think this kind of loot is fine for absolute endgame worldbosses who drop the best of loot, but this level of items is not okay for leveling where everyone will just try to blow through fast.
The fact that loot is so scarce might be the reason why people don't do the dragon. At the very least it should drop a big chunk of experience and some materials for people to craft a single item.
The fact that loot is so scarce might be the reason why people don't do the dragon. At the very least it should drop a big chunk of experience and some materials for people to craft a single item.
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
Firebrand and general boss feeedback:
AoC is supposed to have active block, dodge and stamina systems. Please use them more in boss fights.
Tail swipes should knock you back if you don't dodge them
Any attacks which produce a shock wave should require a dodge or maybe a jump to avoid getting knock down.
I like that the boss moves on the arena, but I feel it could be even more aggressive, flank players, picking new targets in the player group to force the group to move around, redirect aggro. Especially versus ranged players, as those guys seem to had it "easy".
Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom "dungeon" felt a bit short and basic. It could use more enemies and enemy types. Maybe a swarm like enemy type, numerous, quick, coming in waves, with low HP / damage output but able to surround the players, prevent them from moving away, whilst few elite enemies - the real threat - approach slower in that swarm.
AoC is supposed to have active block, dodge and stamina systems. Please use them more in boss fights.
Tail swipes should knock you back if you don't dodge them
Any attacks which produce a shock wave should require a dodge or maybe a jump to avoid getting knock down.
I like that the boss moves on the arena, but I feel it could be even more aggressive, flank players, picking new targets in the player group to force the group to move around, redirect aggro. Especially versus ranged players, as those guys seem to had it "easy".
Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom "dungeon" felt a bit short and basic. It could use more enemies and enemy types. Maybe a swarm like enemy type, numerous, quick, coming in waves, with low HP / damage output but able to surround the players, prevent them from moving away, whilst few elite enemies - the real threat - approach slower in that swarm.