Best Of
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.
Indeed you can.
In the next election.
Noaani
1
Re: Vassal resentment
1. You are not even answering my point you are just starting the obvious. Because as i said its just about you wanting to attack even though there is no true draw back or actual control forced over you.
2. You complaining about being forced to be vassalized, means you need to attack another node to get yuors up, being the parent node. On the chance you don't care about your own nodes growth getting to the next rank, means you simply want to be able to PvP the node. Cut the BS please, my point stands systems like this need to be in place for people like you.
3. IT has nothing to do with the node you live in, im talking about rats that just want to attack everything or be used by other nodes to destroy things around them. Again you fit the bill.
Every bit of vibe I get from you would be someone that would 100% kill a server if you got into that kind of position (not that it would ever happen though).
1: how do you know that there is no drawback? I can think of several drawbacks like limiting the growth of your node and taxes on top of what you already have to pay for citizenship.
2: bold of you to assume that I need to lie to beat you in an argument. you don't know me therefore you have no idea what systems should be in place for people like me. personally I don't care if my node is above other nodes. I do care if it's bellow another node.
making it so that you can't free yourself from a master node, forces me to get into a lot of PVP to keep neighboring nodes from leveling in the first place when I would much rather just do PVE.
3: I highly doubt the people you refer to as rats are going to be in any way confined to lower level nodes. those assholes tend to worm their way into all sorts of places just to ruin other peoples days. I also doubt that they would have a whole lot of node loyalty. so I don't really see why they are applicable to this topic.
1. You can read what they already put on the whole system, its funny your comment is asking me "how do i know there is no draw back" you are trying to use fear mongering essentially. There will be taxes everywhere so what, that is part of the game. And also more than likely going to be part of a strategy advantage to weakening nodes by destroying smaller ones.
The main taxes you need to worry about are the ones YOUR OWN node sets. If you don't like them or how things are run look at other nodes go move to that fit your situation better.
Obviously you can't increased your node further once you have a parent node. IF being in the highest node is what is needed for your experience just move to it. All nodes will still grow based the level of it and how much the people in the node invest in it.
2. Your type is clear as day to me i know your type very well, its clear in your nodes, the fact of you making your node, and your interaction with it. You continue to make that more clear, you would be poison to the server in a world where all nodes could be attackable.
3. Its a mind set, and you fit the bill this is why you are so emotionally invested caring about being vassal to another node(regardless of the benefits). You are one person I wouldn't trust, if for whatever reason I was in talks with you. You are the type of person that would be the first to throw a dagger in some ones back. It be like in a snake bit trying to be the kill the rest to come out as the strongest. Though you would end up coming out alone and it be your own weakness.
Mag7spy
1
Re: Firebrand - A little suggestion
I completely agree with Malva. A dragon is always a classic creature that can't be missing from any good MMORPG and the experience of meeting one should always be remarkable!
We know it's in Alpha and everything is in development, one step at a time. And before I suggest anything, I want to make it clear that the dragon itself is visually very satisfying, its attacks are beautiful to look at and the combat against it is also satisfying. But, as Malva mentioned, there's a whole context in which that encounter with the dragon takes place. He's furious, someone has taken an egg that belongs to him, this should be received by him as both a deep offense and a declaration of war against him. So, yes, he should come attacking everyone in that area, given the fact that anyone there could be in possession of the egg and his aggro radius should even be larger due to the fury of the moment!
This will give greater depth to the weight of the mission's story, which will consequently increase the immersion of the players taking part in that mission!
We know it's in Alpha and everything is in development, one step at a time. And before I suggest anything, I want to make it clear that the dragon itself is visually very satisfying, its attacks are beautiful to look at and the combat against it is also satisfying. But, as Malva mentioned, there's a whole context in which that encounter with the dragon takes place. He's furious, someone has taken an egg that belongs to him, this should be received by him as both a deep offense and a declaration of war against him. So, yes, he should come attacking everyone in that area, given the fact that anyone there could be in possession of the egg and his aggro radius should even be larger due to the fury of the moment!
This will give greater depth to the weight of the mission's story, which will consequently increase the immersion of the players taking part in that mission!
Re: Vassal resentment
Why would we assume the best players are in the metropolis?
Well if not best - then for sure the most dedicated. And those who spend most time in the game. And yes i am aware that is not how skill is determined, but if you have big enough time to spend in AOC, then you would have been spending this same time on other games before this. So i would assume that they will be with above average skill (ofc not all of these players, but most).Why would we assume players in the parent node would care about the vassal?
Vasal nodes pay taxes, Contribute with exp, Their ZOI is part of the Metropolis ZOI, so if a city gets destroyed for example, the Whole Vasal system loses territory.If you are assuming the above for what ever reason, why are you not distracting the players in that parent node at a point in time when you are sieging the lower level nodes?
The sieges have preparation time. You cant make a surprising siege while you distract the Metropolis. They will have for example few days to prepare for this siege that will happen in the EXACT allocated time
The best players will play in the node that is most advantageous to them. That will not always be a metropolis. Dedication is not a factor that comes in to it, as many players are aware thst they don't want to be in a metropolis and so will work to make sure that is the case.
Sure, vassals contribute, but the average person in a node has no reason to care about any of that. Definitely not enough reason to care to spend time attempting to defend that node. Even more true when you consider that a lost lower level node will usually just result in a different type of node taking its place, which is then contributing to the parent node, and has the added benefit of changing the local content making things more interesting. When you also factor in the changes to local services that some players will find appealing, it is reasonable to assume thst some people in the parent node may well be all for the vassal being destroyed.
Sieges do indeed have preparation time. So you distract people with something more important at the actual time of the siege.
Declare a war on the parent node to coincide with the lower node siege. Most players would much rather protect their nodes existing services than spend time defending a minor tax/experience contributor.
Again, do more thinking before forming opinions on the matter.
Noaani
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Seems like a allot of back and forth on what is a major tenant of the game. Steven will not removed the pillars of what makes this game. Everything else he is willing to hear feedback on.
This type of class system, where is designed for group content, will always have a few classes by the role they fill in a team, that will solo better then others. That being said, you will need to be selective as to what you try and solo. It will be a fact. If some solo play is your thing, make sure you pick the right class. Done!
This type of class system, where is designed for group content, will always have a few classes by the role they fill in a team, that will solo better then others. That being said, you will need to be selective as to what you try and solo. It will be a fact. If some solo play is your thing, make sure you pick the right class. Done!
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »No YOU don't want that.
Yes he d~ooees ... ... ...
If you want to play an MMO where You can "SOLO" +90% of the Open World, like in Worst of Warcraft,
then Ashes of Creation might not be the Game for You, Airborne.
You can get jumped and ganked by People " EVERYWHERE " - > by People who probably aim specifically for Lone Wolf-like Players who always run around solo.
Or run around most of their time solo. Do you really wish to be that easy an Target ?
AirborneBerserker wrote: »Because even if people are willing to group and you start forcing people to do things they aren't ready to do they will stop playing the game, and even if they do participate in whatever thing you want to they will be resentful.
I am more than willing than You being resentful at People -> if it means People will be "FORCED" to play a huge and i truly mean, "HUGE" Communities and Teams in this coming Game,
so that it actually " feels* " like we are indeed a mighty Node. A strong Village. An even stronger, ambitious Town. A veeery strong City. Or even a mighty Metropolis who entirely DOMINATES the surrounding Lands for Glory and Greatness.
Don't resent the Player. Resent the Game. (lol)
Aszkalon
3
Re: Firebrand - A little suggestion
Also i would like to add on this to a degree for other mobs. Some mobs should have longer agro range than other even in the same mob groups. For example there could be a mob named Vangarian watchman for example might be more alert and have like a 20% larger agro range than all the other vangarian mobs since his job is to watch out for things, Wolfs might have longer agro range than say plant mobs since they have a scent of smell.
Patrolling mobs should have longer agro range too since you would think they would be more alert on their patrols. Would mix things up when farming having to keep an eye out on patrols or mobs with more alert agro range.
Patrolling mobs should have longer agro range too since you would think they would be more alert on their patrols. Would mix things up when farming having to keep an eye out on patrols or mobs with more alert agro range.
Veeshan
3
Firebrand - A little suggestion
After the event ended, we saw how Firebrand immediately arrived in the region, certain that the adventurers had taken something that was his property.
With this same certainty, he should immediately attack the players who triggered the event. He looks directly at the group and roars, attacking would be the logical sequence of this.
And not just stand there eating grass.
So only after this initial attack against whoever triggered the event, should he enter "standby mode".
However, instead of remaining static, he could walk or fly around the arena, while roaring as if he were actually searching for something.
Then as soon as a new group of players entered the area, he would immediately attack those players, thus starting a new battle.
Another suggestion I would make is to increase the Boss's aggro area. Because, although on the minimap it seems like a large area, we can see Steven and his group getting very close to the dragon before it actually enters "combat mode". Which doesn't make sense for a dragon that is enraged and looking for something.
With this same certainty, he should immediately attack the players who triggered the event. He looks directly at the group and roars, attacking would be the logical sequence of this.
And not just stand there eating grass.
So only after this initial attack against whoever triggered the event, should he enter "standby mode".
However, instead of remaining static, he could walk or fly around the arena, while roaring as if he were actually searching for something.
Then as soon as a new group of players entered the area, he would immediately attack those players, thus starting a new battle.
Another suggestion I would make is to increase the Boss's aggro area. Because, although on the minimap it seems like a large area, we can see Steven and his group getting very close to the dragon before it actually enters "combat mode". Which doesn't make sense for a dragon that is enraged and looking for something.
Malva
7