Best Of
Re: Extreme PvP: The Blood Eclipse: Global PvP Armageddon Event
Arya_Yeshe wrote: »Once a month, a mysterious red eclipse blankets the skies of Verra, the divine order collapses and the lawless areas get expanded claiming lands in all directions.
And Guts only like : " STEV~EEEEENNNNN !!!!! " (lol)
Arya_Yeshe wrote: »Everyone in those zones is automatically flagged for PvP, even if the lawlessness expands into safe zones like cities and taverns, guards gone, flee or die, quests suspended, everybody is out there for murder!
* Ding Dooonnng *
Huh ?
Who are "these" People ?
Arya_Yeshe wrote: »Massive Soul-Stacking Effects:
- each collected soul +5% damage dealt -2% heal received
- reach 50 kills, you become a "Blood Herald" with world announcements, visual effects, and bumps your damage to 400% (equivalent of taking the Quad Damage item in the Quake games) and 400% extra damage is the limit you go. Everyone can see you on the map
- The Blood Heralds can only be healed by over time, just like ships
Armageddon Diplomacy:
- Start wars for free and without any timers during the eclipse, just slap the declare war button and start killing
Armageddon Rewards:
- Players drop gold upon death, scaled to the region’s average PvE rewards. Their ashes will contain loot from the NPC loot table of that area (based on where the killing blow was struck), even if the player doesn't possess those items .Plus their regular player drops (consumables, materials).
- The top 100 killers get unique permanent cosmetic rewards, like glowing red auras, blood-forged mounts, and corrupted pets and so on
- The Blood King/Queen (most kills, least deaths) becomes a temporary world boss the next month
- Every guild that took over a node during the event gets a 7 day tax immunity and a unique cosmetics, banners, etc
I love how You haven't forgotten about the most important part.
Making it desirable and actually motivate People to want to do this, via certain Rewards that You can ONLY. GET. if. you. participate. in these monthly, Purge-like lawless Times.
. 
Aszkalon
1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq5T6tOn7RYRe: Risk, Reward, Difficulty & FUN: What Intrepid is Missing
i'd rather do a 1000 kill and collect quests than farm mobs like a bot
Re: Risk, Reward, Difficulty & FUN: What Intrepid is Missing
Hope you reported it, cause they dropped just fine for me.Quests are a must. But if i am not wrong -> all we have right now are either Subjugation/Kill Quests,
or Quests to find and bring Stuff that takes an Eternity to drop and collect - right ?
I feel like you're talking about commissions w/o talking about commissions, cause you've just described artisanry commissions, even though so far they're only about gathering, rather than other professions.Can We please have Quests where we gather Fish ?
Gather Herbs ?
Chop down XXX Sort of Tree or something ?
Break down XXX Sorts of Ore ?
Considering that artisanry is tightly tied to node buildings, I highly doubt we'll see quests that reward tools.Maybe a Quest that we can finally get some Gear for Ores (Mining) above Novice Level ?
Ludullu
1
Re: Risk, Reward, Difficulty & FUN: What Intrepid is Missing
The problem with this notion is that it is either very poorly done, or it takes a stupid amount of developer time. More time than Intrepid are likely to be able to put in to it.In a way, M O D U L E S are meant to represent this. There might be some story happening on the other side of the map one day, and you don't have the time/planning to go there, so you miss a part of it. But when you do arrive there - the story is continuing.
It doesn't continue there "for no reason". It exists because some actions preceeded it.
From a realistic perspective, if you have this piece of content happening in a small part of the game world for a small amount of time, there is a really good chance that the total number of developer hours spent on it will be greater than the total number of player hours spent on it.
The larger the game world, the larger the server population, the smaller the percentage of your population have the ability to experience that piece of content.
The entire notion of that strikes me as a child thinking "wouldn't it be cool if" as opposed to a responsible adult thinking "How do I make this game financially viable?".
While I don't know what form it will take, expect some form of disapointment around this system. The numbers just don't add up for any other result.
Noaani
1
Re: Risk, Reward, Difficulty & FUN: What Intrepid is Missing
In a proper living world they would have a reason to exist. It's simply that not everyone in the game will experience the exact same event around that reason.You can stumble upon certain bosses, NPCs, etc. - but without an overall story and lore, they just exist in the world - for no apparent reason.
In a way, M O D U L E S are meant to represent this. There might be some story happening on the other side of the map one day, and you don't have the time/planning to go there, so you miss a part of it. But when you do arrive there - the story is continuing.
It doesn't continue there "for no reason". It exists because some actions preceeded it.
The same can be applied to literally any point of any story, and players, imo, should just be able to enter that story at any point and through as many means as possible. To me, THAT is a true living world that doesn't wait for the player to catch up.
That is why I love the sandboxiness of mmos (well, the ones that have it) and why I mostly consider players to be the game's content. If I join a guild - they'll have had a history already, they'll have a reputation already, they'll have some accomplishments from the past - and I'm joining them in the middle of their road (or it could be nearing its end or just beginning).
I wish quests could serve the same interactive function, but it's obvious that majority of quest lovers just wanna be the MC and for the world to revolve around them (not saying you or something else here have indicated that desire). And there's also the "fomo" of it all, where if a story happens somewhere and some "MC" misses it - they'll complain that the story happened w/o them.
In a way, it's the tree in a forest example that I gave, except from the pov of someone who KNOWS it makes a sound and wants to hear it, but was unable to, for some reason.
In other words, once again, my preferences go against the majority's.
Ideally, yes, that's how it's supposed to work. Especially when we consider Ashes will (hopefully) have a dynamic world, where no 2 servers are the same, and the environment keeps changing based on player activity (are we yet to see any of that work in game?).
In a sense, such game doesn't need a set storyline, because players will affect the storyline itself, and the way it plays out in the world, rather than you playing through a pre-made story.
You don't need that many writers, etc. but you do need extra dev resources in order to make the system good and immersive.
In such a setting, quests will be boring I feel. Dynamic events that pop up will be there to "progress the story", rather than quests. Player actions will be there to do the same.
Quests will only be there as rough guides, and will mostly consist of go to X, kill Y amount of Z, etc.
I don't think you can have both an in depth and great questing system that provides content, and a dynamic world where you don't have a set storyline that's meant to play out as you progress in the game.
You could do something like GW2, where quests are like events that you and others complete together, but I don't find that particularly enjoyable. - Besides, GW2 does have a storyline that you play through via green (story) quests - which you don't even have to do.
iccer
1
How Do You Feel About Immersion-Focused Changes That Shift (by complicating) Game Mechanics?
An effort to 'get out of my info bubble' a bit. Will try to keep initial short as usual, lmk if it ends up unclear as a result.
When games develop over time they sometimes would need to change/replace a well-known system to add more immersive elements (this also happens for balance but that might need to be discussed separately).
Simple example is a game that only has two types of weather, and a thing in the game that reacts to these binary weather states, changing their weather system so that there are either more types of weather or more gradations of the binary states (let's use rain for simplicity).
If the game starts off as 'when it rains, this thing happens' and then switches to 'we have expanded the weather system so that rain can now be heavy, light, or 'monsoon', and also added sleet which is counted as light rain'...
Obviously if you had something you liked doing in rain and now that thing only happens in Heavy Rain, at MINIMUM your chances of being able to do that thing are probably reduced and that's probably annoying, but...
Do you see it as worth the change if it adds other mechanics (and therefore just grumble) or do you think that games shouldn't make changes like this at all?
(if you prefer droprates, crafting systems, combat, or whatever else as your input to this discussion, plz use that).
When games develop over time they sometimes would need to change/replace a well-known system to add more immersive elements (this also happens for balance but that might need to be discussed separately).
Simple example is a game that only has two types of weather, and a thing in the game that reacts to these binary weather states, changing their weather system so that there are either more types of weather or more gradations of the binary states (let's use rain for simplicity).
If the game starts off as 'when it rains, this thing happens' and then switches to 'we have expanded the weather system so that rain can now be heavy, light, or 'monsoon', and also added sleet which is counted as light rain'...
Obviously if you had something you liked doing in rain and now that thing only happens in Heavy Rain, at MINIMUM your chances of being able to do that thing are probably reduced and that's probably annoying, but...
Do you see it as worth the change if it adds other mechanics (and therefore just grumble) or do you think that games shouldn't make changes like this at all?
(if you prefer droprates, crafting systems, combat, or whatever else as your input to this discussion, plz use that).
Azherae
1
Re: Exterme PvP: Lich King Build: Turn Dead Players into Your Army
This reminds me when during late Battle for Azerit -> in Worst of Warcraft,
during the "Ny'alotha Content Patch" -> Players could stack something up that had to do with the "Darkness/Insanity(?)-Stuff" during that Patch,
and a Solo Player became something like a SMALL RAID BOSS during that Event - and terrorised Orgrimmar for awhile and killed Horde Players who challenged him -> while clapping and beating and killing NPC-Guards of Orgrimmar at the same time..
wow I wasnt around when this happened, this sounds amazing
Re: A real MMO and a good game.
No, we don't agree on this.coeurdelion wrote: »
This makes no sense.
There is no difference in my need for other players if I am able to craft on my main or if I need an alt. In both cases, Ashes system of harvesting, processing and crafting is the primary reason I *NEED* others. That doesn't change in any way with your suggestion - I can still only do one aspect.
If you're strong in combat, you can access dangerous areas alone. We agree on that. So you can gather without help.
This being true or not is 100% a factor of world design. If Intrepid wish to make it so you always need help when harvesting, they can achieve that easier and better without your suggestion.
In regards to the intention of the games design, you are factually lncorrect here.Whereas, if you're just a crafter and the area is too dangerous for you, you definitely need a fighter. And the fighter absolutely needs a crafter to be a good fighter, especially for PvP.
A crafter will not be able to do anything with those raw materials. They do not need someone to come and protect them while they harvest, because a crafter can not harvest.
Rather, as per the games intention, that crafter will need a harvester to harvest those materials. The crafter can not be a harvester.
However, once those materials are harvested, the crafter still can't use them. Before the crafter can use them, the harvester needs to hand them off to a processor to turn those raw materials in to something there crafter can use to make the final product.
This is how Ashes intends to achieve the goal thet you are talking about of making people more reliant on each other, a far better method of achieving that goal than your suggestion.
This is indeed your opinion.We can talk about it for hours and remain in our own opinions... I repeat again, this is just my opinion, and my opinion only.
The problem is, it is an opinion formed without the foundation of understanding of the intended design of this game. In other words, it is an uninformed opinion.
Noaani
1
Re: A real MMO and a good game.
How can it rise when we've been at its peak lvls since the very start?sensing a rising level of FOMO....
Ludullu
1