Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about Phase II and Phase III testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about Phase II and Phase III testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Best Of
Re: Node War Spawn Camping Zerg BS
tbh homespawn and closest spawn should never be the same spot if they are the same the closest respawn should be bumped back to the 2nd closest respawn to always allow 2 respawn spots options and allow one side to regroup atleast.
there also need 2 be a period of time grace period between war decs like 15 mins or something because atm it 100% favors the attacking side greatly where they can set up to aoe kill everyone the moment they war dec and then proceed to spawn camp them afterwards
there also need 2 be a period of time grace period between war decs like 15 mins or something because atm it 100% favors the attacking side greatly where they can set up to aoe kill everyone the moment they war dec and then proceed to spawn camp them afterwards
Veeshan
1
Dunir Camara
The Camara seems a little high could there be a way to adjust it? I don't have the feeling of being a Dunir my view/camara center point is to high. Anyone else feel this way?
Re: AoC isn’t Punishing its Frustrating
Imagine an Easter Event. In keeping with my recent 'using Throne and Liberty instead of mentioning anything in Ashes until I understand why we should try to only give feelings and not solutions', let's use Purelight Tower in that game. A good 'PvP map' if you instanced it.
Let's say you had eggs hidden everywhere on this map and your goal was to collect them and turn them in somewhere, and that this event definitely had options for FFA PvP for the entire duration.
Here's some equivalents of the terrible ideas I've heard over the years from certain types of players and people:
A lot of the time, Ashes design is all this, plus 'you get more powerful the more eggs you are carrying'.
All us 'weak' and 'soft' and 'PvE' players aren't going to play that. But it's not because that can't be fun if you like PvP, it's that we know that there are too many ways and too many people who will set out to make it as frustrating as possible.
Preserving the fun of this hypothetical event for everyone is impossible because for some, 'being able to impose their will completely on others using the tactics allowed by the above' is the fun, and those are the people you have to watch out for if you want something like 'a fun Easter Event'. Because it has to be fun for losers, and for that to happen it has to disincentivize certain optimal tactics from 'winners'.
Suggest any of the obvious ones though, and you'll get the natural reaction from the type I'm talking about. Because the game is less fun for them if there are 3-5 turn-in points and only one is at the top of the tower. They don't want to have to deal with stealth players, or 'PvE skill' players, or 'having to collect their own eggs', so they complain if you make it so that you can't take eggs from the defeated.
Some don't even care about the event and just want the PvP and will ignore all the eggs and the point of the event so even if you take the 'best' approach and just have 'both sides' get half their eggs broken just for engaging in PvP at all (to have a proper incentive for how you move around in the event space), there will absolutely be people who just run around without eggs looking for people to attack.
If you make them 'require at least one egg to initiate PvP' you will get whiners about how it's a Carebear event and how games need to stop catering to the PvE crowd.
Tell me what would have happened in L2 in this hypothetical event, because that community must be/have been truly amazing in some way. Unfortunately I still can't find any evidence of it, all I find is the same behaviour and approximate ratios of perspectives that I've always seen and still see now, where games with overall good PvP setups get warped by one extreme side of the playerbase.
Assume I closed this with a 'eggs in one basket' joke of your choosing.
Let's say you had eggs hidden everywhere on this map and your goal was to collect them and turn them in somewhere, and that this event definitely had options for FFA PvP for the entire duration.
Here's some equivalents of the terrible ideas I've heard over the years from certain types of players and people:
- There should be only one turn-in point (and it should be at the top of the tower too)
- You should get to take the eggs of the people you attack if you kill them
- Eggs should spawn mostly at chokepoints so that people are forced to PvP for them
- There should only be a few (or even just one) spawn for eggs at a time (but it does rotate location)
A lot of the time, Ashes design is all this, plus 'you get more powerful the more eggs you are carrying'.
All us 'weak' and 'soft' and 'PvE' players aren't going to play that. But it's not because that can't be fun if you like PvP, it's that we know that there are too many ways and too many people who will set out to make it as frustrating as possible.
Preserving the fun of this hypothetical event for everyone is impossible because for some, 'being able to impose their will completely on others using the tactics allowed by the above' is the fun, and those are the people you have to watch out for if you want something like 'a fun Easter Event'. Because it has to be fun for losers, and for that to happen it has to disincentivize certain optimal tactics from 'winners'.
Suggest any of the obvious ones though, and you'll get the natural reaction from the type I'm talking about. Because the game is less fun for them if there are 3-5 turn-in points and only one is at the top of the tower. They don't want to have to deal with stealth players, or 'PvE skill' players, or 'having to collect their own eggs', so they complain if you make it so that you can't take eggs from the defeated.
Some don't even care about the event and just want the PvP and will ignore all the eggs and the point of the event so even if you take the 'best' approach and just have 'both sides' get half their eggs broken just for engaging in PvP at all (to have a proper incentive for how you move around in the event space), there will absolutely be people who just run around without eggs looking for people to attack.
If you make them 'require at least one egg to initiate PvP' you will get whiners about how it's a Carebear event and how games need to stop catering to the PvE crowd.
Tell me what would have happened in L2 in this hypothetical event, because that community must be/have been truly amazing in some way. Unfortunately I still can't find any evidence of it, all I find is the same behaviour and approximate ratios of perspectives that I've always seen and still see now, where games with overall good PvP setups get warped by one extreme side of the playerbase.
Assume I closed this with a 'eggs in one basket' joke of your choosing.
Azherae
2
Re: Demoting skills losing progress
I had to redo Apprentice to Journeyman Lumberjacking because I must have hit demote instead of promote. That or the game just goofed.
This could be solved with a prompt that states what the game is about to do and asks you to confirm or deny the action. I want to say I remember such a prompt existing, but I don't remember getting it anytime recently.
Maybe I am just remembering what I want to exist.
This could be solved with a prompt that states what the game is about to do and asks you to confirm or deny the action. I want to say I remember such a prompt existing, but I don't remember getting it anytime recently.
Maybe I am just remembering what I want to exist.
Vhaeyne
1
Re: So Disappointed
Who gives a shit about Narc. Dudes content has been dishonest for years, made his living riding Stevens name and company to fame and can't hack the industry otherwise.
Solvryn
3
Re: AoC isn’t Punishing its Frustrating
- Ash’s is a game with XP debt
- At least 25% material loss on death
- And some of the most insane travel time in any game.
All these points above will be something Intrepid team will end up changing. Once the game releases they will have clear data this is not working out for them and a big turnoff for any new player coming in. XP debt and material loss should be in PvP only like New World. Travel time, Intrepid team will realize over time this is going to cause certain areas to be completely dead.
Right now, end game has so much griefing it's almost impossible to enjoy end game pve content
I spent two days this last weekend grouping in Carphin Tower level 4 and the Steel Bloom sewers as a level 24 bard. This was in a guild group and in multiple pugs. There was so much grief training from certain people or even groups that it was impossible with experience debt to actually level. We might be able to get in a few pulls after we found a spot before being trained with multiple mobs from the zone. Even if you killed these people, they'd be back doing the same thing for hours. They're whole goal was just to grief people.
At one point I was so frustrated because I felt like I couldn't play that I decided to relax and work on my mining and herbalism. I kid you not. A bard and friends decided to follow me around. As I would start gathering, the bard would marionette (crowd control) me and take whatever gatherable I was trying to mine. They had nothing better to do than to try and ruin my game. There's no way I could beat them. I was so frustrated that I logged out of the game and haven't logged in for over 24 hours. I'll get over it, but it is what it is.
This is a great game, and I haven't been addicted like this in a long time. My concern is that at max level there are a few people who enjoy the aspect of griefing others. It's not about their love of pvp or trying to take over a camping spot. They genuinely just want to ruin the game for others and they will do it for hours because they find it enjoyable. There's very few consequences to discourage them from this behavior. If they are killed or die, they just come right back and start it all over again.
I know there is a fine balance in here somewhere, but right now griefers are in control. Are there any suggestions to discourage this type of behavior while still maintaining the integrity of the game?
At one point I was so frustrated because I felt like I couldn't play that I decided to relax and work on my mining and herbalism. I kid you not. A bard and friends decided to follow me around. As I would start gathering, the bard would marionette (crowd control) me and take whatever gatherable I was trying to mine. They had nothing better to do than to try and ruin my game. There's no way I could beat them. I was so frustrated that I logged out of the game and haven't logged in for over 24 hours. I'll get over it, but it is what it is.
This is a great game, and I haven't been addicted like this in a long time. My concern is that at max level there are a few people who enjoy the aspect of griefing others. It's not about their love of pvp or trying to take over a camping spot. They genuinely just want to ruin the game for others and they will do it for hours because they find it enjoyable. There's very few consequences to discourage them from this behavior. If they are killed or die, they just come right back and start it all over again.
I know there is a fine balance in here somewhere, but right now griefers are in control. Are there any suggestions to discourage this type of behavior while still maintaining the integrity of the game?
Re: Right now, end game has so much griefing it's almost impossible to enjoy end game pve content
I'm glad they're (griefers) doing this now. They should be pushing this envelope. Better to be done in Alpha than Release. And make your grievance known as you are. If testing/playing isn't fun just logout. If the numbers of testers drop maybe something will happen, if the don't drop then Intrepid has no reason to change anything, and we can assume people like it the way it is.
Mob trains would be a funny thing for this game to die on. lmao.
Mob trains would be a funny thing for this game to die on. lmao.
Volgaris
2
Caravans - General Mechanic Suggestions
While caravans are a good source of money, I also love seeing the aesthetic of them travelling on the roads bringing more life to the world.
However, with my experience with the mechanics from both a caravan owner, a defender and an attacker, attacking a caravan doesn't make much sense compared to the player PvP mechanics.
How it currently works, it is 'legal' for players to join as attackers and attack a caravan with no repercussions; you have everything to gain and nothing to lose. While running a caravan is all risk as there is no additional benefits for defending a caravan successfully either for the caravan owner or the defenders which have no incentive to defend a caravan.
Suggested Options/Changes:
Consistency - Make Caravan attacks follow the same PvP mechanics and attacking a caravan flags you and defeating/taking anything from the caravan or defenders will add to your corruption. Just as in player PvP, caravan attackers should be considered as much a villain as PvP players. Considering a caravan as automatically consensual PvP doesn't make sense.
Town Imports/Exports - Add commodities that a town requires for leveling the node and for upkeep of its needs and citizen lifestyle. This would add a mechanic where caravans are needed to help support nodes by trading with their neighbors. Which then makes defense of caravans much more important to nodes and they develop a policing system where they organize protection of caravans. Include a notification to a mayor where the destination of the caravan is going so they can help mount a defense of the caravan as it will be carrying goods their town needs.
Caravan Defenses - Militia - Add a contract system when starting a caravan and add coin to a pool that is shared with all Defenders who sign the contract and see the caravan to its destination (which should be listed in the contract) and scales based on how far a defender joins the contract (i.e. a defender should not get a full share if they join half way or the last few feet of reaching the destination).
Caravan Defenses - Mounted Weapons - Add the option to add mounted weapons or riding slots where defenders can ride on the caravan and debark to engage in melee or attack ranged from the caravan's protection (limited, less than the rider gets). Also have a caravan slot for mounted weapons that can be manned such as arbalests or magic weapons like a flame thrower. At which point you could actually use a caravan to attack other caravans.
Caravan Markers - Add a marking system for caravans so you know which ones you have contracted to defend. Especially if you are the owner. There seems to be a lot of confusion when caravan trains get raided, and people lose which caravan is which. Make sure the Caravan Event notifications identify who the owner is, so you are choosing to attack or defend the caravan you are specifically wanting to partake in.
Caravan Event Caps - Set a maximum number of attackers and defenders for a caravan event to reduce zerging and abuse of some mechanics used for griefing. This could be managed by Raid Group mechanics; any player choosing Attack or Defend will automatically be put into a Raid Group of their contracted peers.
TLDR; Caravan mechanics need more love in keeping the world lively and making the caravan fair and fun on both sides.
However, with my experience with the mechanics from both a caravan owner, a defender and an attacker, attacking a caravan doesn't make much sense compared to the player PvP mechanics.
How it currently works, it is 'legal' for players to join as attackers and attack a caravan with no repercussions; you have everything to gain and nothing to lose. While running a caravan is all risk as there is no additional benefits for defending a caravan successfully either for the caravan owner or the defenders which have no incentive to defend a caravan.
Suggested Options/Changes:
Consistency - Make Caravan attacks follow the same PvP mechanics and attacking a caravan flags you and defeating/taking anything from the caravan or defenders will add to your corruption. Just as in player PvP, caravan attackers should be considered as much a villain as PvP players. Considering a caravan as automatically consensual PvP doesn't make sense.
Town Imports/Exports - Add commodities that a town requires for leveling the node and for upkeep of its needs and citizen lifestyle. This would add a mechanic where caravans are needed to help support nodes by trading with their neighbors. Which then makes defense of caravans much more important to nodes and they develop a policing system where they organize protection of caravans. Include a notification to a mayor where the destination of the caravan is going so they can help mount a defense of the caravan as it will be carrying goods their town needs.
Caravan Defenses - Militia - Add a contract system when starting a caravan and add coin to a pool that is shared with all Defenders who sign the contract and see the caravan to its destination (which should be listed in the contract) and scales based on how far a defender joins the contract (i.e. a defender should not get a full share if they join half way or the last few feet of reaching the destination).
Caravan Defenses - Mounted Weapons - Add the option to add mounted weapons or riding slots where defenders can ride on the caravan and debark to engage in melee or attack ranged from the caravan's protection (limited, less than the rider gets). Also have a caravan slot for mounted weapons that can be manned such as arbalests or magic weapons like a flame thrower. At which point you could actually use a caravan to attack other caravans.
Caravan Markers - Add a marking system for caravans so you know which ones you have contracted to defend. Especially if you are the owner. There seems to be a lot of confusion when caravan trains get raided, and people lose which caravan is which. Make sure the Caravan Event notifications identify who the owner is, so you are choosing to attack or defend the caravan you are specifically wanting to partake in.
Caravan Event Caps - Set a maximum number of attackers and defenders for a caravan event to reduce zerging and abuse of some mechanics used for griefing. This could be managed by Raid Group mechanics; any player choosing Attack or Defend will automatically be put into a Raid Group of their contracted peers.
TLDR; Caravan mechanics need more love in keeping the world lively and making the caravan fair and fun on both sides.
MythGS
3