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: Save weapon
This link may help you: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Gear_appearance_priority
Econ-Friday Ranting (a Reference Post)
Phase 2 is approaching (insert multiple Game of Thrones memes, whichever ones you like)
That means it's time for my group and I to do Econ Testing and give feedback. For this, I need some context on intent, but I don't hang out on Discord and even if I did, it'd be way faster for anyone on the team to read through my many assumptions in one place.
I basically need to know if the Ashes economy is supposed to feel like New World(EVE sorta), or like FF11/Throne and Liberty, to inform our testing approach.
FFXI/Throne and Liberty Method
Henceforth referred to as the 10K form (yes I will goldbold it every time, go gold, go bold).
"New World" Method
Henceforth referred to as the UBI form (this color isn't too biased, right? If people prefer I'll change this from 'UBI' to 'AllTree')
These two things are tested differently, for the sake of any discussion that might happen I'll try to explain why.
The reason I don't play EVE is that I knew for a long time that the Devs were basically just controlling the economy in a way that let them decide winners and losers very directly. Whether they did this or not was not important. They could. So I can't take EVE seriously, it markets itself as an Econ game, a simulator, but the 'stories' are controlled by the devs. Ashes is unclear about this. They have this option, but one might assume that in a game about player built Nodes and structures, they would not want to.
If Ashes uses the UBI form, the goal in testing would always be to 'win the Dev-set econ challenge minigame' and then use the winnings to get more permanent power as quickly as possible.
The reason I enjoy TL is that currently, niches exist and the Devs don't seem to interfere too much except in very global ways (we're seeing a bit of the Amazon Games style creeping in, but the underlying 10K basis mitigates some of this, leading to mostly grumbles rather than hoarding). So you know that basically anything that takes around an hour to get sells on the AH for 10 Lucent. If supply is too high, don't gather that thing, or push it through a different value pipeline (not all of these exist yet, for example Blue Armor Extracts from common farming grounds that should be going through some other pipeline like Furnishings since their 'Dissolve' option isn't at the 'correct' value and can't be set to that value without a UBI style intervention - which would almost certainly be bad for many reasons, I digress).
If Ashes uses the 10K form, the goal in testing would always be to 'find the appropriate activity niche' and then look toward others to build the interconnective relationships, seeking equilibrium and deprioritizing permanent power.
This is because 10K creates a form of economic 'drag' on anyone rushing to do anything not in their niche just because they can.
Since Econ testing is not a priority in Phase I, and the thing I assume Intrepid is testing is their data collection and visualization, this hasn't come up before, but as we move into Phase 2, I/we need to know how to approach it, especially if we're supposed to test the FTUE more than once, and definitely if the iterations don't wipe the server.
An Alpha always acts at least somewhat like UBI if one is trying to 'compete' or even just 'progress well'. I can definitely get my group to not focus on that, but if the game's intended style is UBI, then that would be the entirely incorrect method for testing for what my group is. Basically if we keep trying to play Ashes as if it is a 10K game and ignoring the signs of UBI approach 'because it's an Alpha', but the UBI style is the intended style, a lot of time is being wasted.
idk, maybe it's silly/overstepping/asking too much to be specifically given this answer, or even 'given this answer relative to any specific stand-up of the servers, but I know that IS does take their testing very seriously, so even just a shorthand somewhere (even just for PTR) of one vs the other would really help. We don't care if they change it every test/wipe/reroll request, as long as they give the data somewhere.
I hope that somehow this was clear enough to explain why this is important to us. If not, please help me by poking at it so that I can clarify it. I'm already in 'crossed fingers' mode because I can't just ask NCSoft/Amazon about their intent for TL atm, and I really want to help my group give the feedback we hope Intrepid wants so they're not doubled down on that particular irritation.
There's obviously more to this (there's always more), but it's all minutiae like droprates and player satisfaction feelings which have nothing in particular to do with the underlying 'way we test', so I'll leave it there.
That means it's time for my group and I to do Econ Testing and give feedback. For this, I need some context on intent, but I don't hang out on Discord and even if I did, it'd be way faster for anyone on the team to read through my many assumptions in one place.
I basically need to know if the Ashes economy is supposed to feel like New World(EVE sorta), or like FF11/Throne and Liberty, to inform our testing approach.
FFXI/Throne and Liberty Method
Henceforth referred to as the 10K form (yes I will goldbold it every time, go gold, go bold).
- Everything can be defined in average time units. The economy is given freedom but a control floor of some kind.
- Players trade their 'time' through some medium of currency (or multiple currencies)
- Specialization and complexity focus on personal enjoyment and spreading out the sources of products
- Somehow, somewhere, economic velocity has a cap or a friction point (FF11: AH slots and resources, originally limited per-game-day purchases, TL: basically the same but also a relatively high hard cap on no-lifing it, after a while you burn money)
"New World" Method
Henceforth referred to as the UBI form (this color isn't too biased, right? If people prefer I'll change this from 'UBI' to 'AllTree')
- The currency value of most things is effectively controlled by the Dev Team.
- Players either ignore this or compete to sort of 'win the econ challenge that the Devs have set for this update/season'
- Specialization and 'complexity' focus on hoarding and knowledge (and speculation on the hoards/knowledge of others)
- Economic velocity is capped only by resource sinks and number of participants (for example New World's original low server CCU was part of this)
These two things are tested differently, for the sake of any discussion that might happen I'll try to explain why.
The reason I don't play EVE is that I knew for a long time that the Devs were basically just controlling the economy in a way that let them decide winners and losers very directly. Whether they did this or not was not important. They could. So I can't take EVE seriously, it markets itself as an Econ game, a simulator, but the 'stories' are controlled by the devs. Ashes is unclear about this. They have this option, but one might assume that in a game about player built Nodes and structures, they would not want to.
If Ashes uses the UBI form, the goal in testing would always be to 'win the Dev-set econ challenge minigame' and then use the winnings to get more permanent power as quickly as possible.
The reason I enjoy TL is that currently, niches exist and the Devs don't seem to interfere too much except in very global ways (we're seeing a bit of the Amazon Games style creeping in, but the underlying 10K basis mitigates some of this, leading to mostly grumbles rather than hoarding). So you know that basically anything that takes around an hour to get sells on the AH for 10 Lucent. If supply is too high, don't gather that thing, or push it through a different value pipeline (not all of these exist yet, for example Blue Armor Extracts from common farming grounds that should be going through some other pipeline like Furnishings since their 'Dissolve' option isn't at the 'correct' value and can't be set to that value without a UBI style intervention - which would almost certainly be bad for many reasons, I digress).
If Ashes uses the 10K form, the goal in testing would always be to 'find the appropriate activity niche' and then look toward others to build the interconnective relationships, seeking equilibrium and deprioritizing permanent power.
This is because 10K creates a form of economic 'drag' on anyone rushing to do anything not in their niche just because they can.
Since Econ testing is not a priority in Phase I, and the thing I assume Intrepid is testing is their data collection and visualization, this hasn't come up before, but as we move into Phase 2, I/we need to know how to approach it, especially if we're supposed to test the FTUE more than once, and definitely if the iterations don't wipe the server.
An Alpha always acts at least somewhat like UBI if one is trying to 'compete' or even just 'progress well'. I can definitely get my group to not focus on that, but if the game's intended style is UBI, then that would be the entirely incorrect method for testing for what my group is. Basically if we keep trying to play Ashes as if it is a 10K game and ignoring the signs of UBI approach 'because it's an Alpha', but the UBI style is the intended style, a lot of time is being wasted.
idk, maybe it's silly/overstepping/asking too much to be specifically given this answer, or even 'given this answer relative to any specific stand-up of the servers, but I know that IS does take their testing very seriously, so even just a shorthand somewhere (even just for PTR) of one vs the other would really help. We don't care if they change it every test/wipe/reroll request, as long as they give the data somewhere.
I hope that somehow this was clear enough to explain why this is important to us. If not, please help me by poking at it so that I can clarify it. I'm already in 'crossed fingers' mode because I can't just ask NCSoft/Amazon about their intent for TL atm, and I really want to help my group give the feedback we hope Intrepid wants so they're not doubled down on that particular irritation.
There's obviously more to this (there's always more), but it's all minutiae like droprates and player satisfaction feelings which have nothing in particular to do with the underlying 'way we test', so I'll leave it there.
Azherae
1
Re: guard system sucks
I get the frustration, but I think the guard system isn't inherently bad, it’s just incomplete and poorly tuned right now.
I think similar. It will be a bit different in the 1.0. Release Version i think. (Hope ^.^)
Like they will STILL be a massive Pain for - for example - corrupted People. But not as invincible seeming as they are right now.
Aszkalon
1
Opacity of Party /non hostile skills
being in thick of things on a tank or as a melee, times can be a little ... Chaotic in parties not all physical dealers. Making things get a bit questionable to see things, react and so on when there are so many visuals flying around just from party members. is there a setting, or something dev's could look at for a sliding scale for opacity of allies spells?
Re: What sets it apart
There are always concerns when one is to determine how valuable a product is to ones hobby. I can come across as rather critical, but its just me refusing to be a fan; if I want something to be good, I try to balance out my bias by being well stingy I suppose. I think perceived issues are important to discuss. It's much better to acknowledge issues before rather than after they happen. Otherwise we're powerless. If they persist, then we know the issue lies elsewhere and one can move on.I understand there are concerns about certain features in Ashes of Creation, like the removal of body blocking, the adjustments to death penalties, and how unique the game will feel. But it's important to remember that AoC is still in development, and community feedback is key to how it evolves.
One of the core features that truly sets AoC apart is the Node System. This system allows player actions to directly influence how the world develops, creating a dynamic and unique experience on every server. Nodes can grow from small camps to sprawling metropolises, unlocking specific content, resources, and political dynamics based on how the community interacts with the world.
Additionally, AoC is built on clear design pillars like an engaging story, a reactive world, meaningful player agency, and a risk vs reward philosophy. All of this is aimed at delivering an immersive and impactful MMORPG experience, where your choices and actions shape the world around you.
While some features have been adjusted during development, it’s crucial to remember these changes are being made to improve gameplay balance and long-term health of the game. The project is very much alive, ambitious, and continues to grow thanks to the active involvement and constructive feedback of the community.
How far along has the node system come? I love the way the idea plays out in my head, but I'm a bit afraid it will be different in practice.
Which risk are we talking about when the on-death loot drop is all but gone? To me the game seems rather risk-free. Will they have a perma death server you think?
Re: Ranger Archetype Changes
The ranger changes feel more like trying to fix a broken foundation rather than rebuilding it. The changes are good, but at the end of the day, they don't solve the issues inherent with the current kit
General Issues (TLDR)
Ranger's "class mechanics" are very lackluster, the skill ceiling is very low, and the class fantasy is not present
Reasoning
I think the ranger is in a very balanced state. It has decent single-target damage, decent AoE damage, decent mobility, decent utility, decent sustain, and decent CCs.
My biggest problem with Ranger is not that the class is weak, as I don't think it is (I don't think Ranger is weak compared to Mage, I think Mage is just too OP rn). My biggest problem with Ranger is that I believe it lacks in both class fantasy and mechanical complexity/skill ceiling.
You usually choose one mark and one hunt and stick with it. The same thing goes for ammo enhancement.
he ranger lacks in its ability to be more of a long-range killing machine, which is one of the main class fantasies of a ranger archetype. The Mage's abilities have the same range as practically all the Rangers' abilities. The ranger is not rewarded for being able to snare/root a mage and then increasing the distance and having that distance advantage. If you are hitting the Mage, the Mage will be hitting you with the same full force. And that goes for classes like bard and cleric as well. Not to mention, this game right now has a ton of mobility throughout all archetypes, and a universal mobility ability (dodge) that can close that gap super quickly. So, even the abilities that have a small range advantage on the ranger are meaningless, as that gap is closed very quickly.
Last but not least, Ranger is not only an archer/sniper type of archetype. Ranger class fantasy is of the hunter, the tracker. Some abilities for that are present, but either fall short or are missing elements to make it work/feel good.
1. Bear trap
Trap Slinger passive is useless, as the time for the trap to land is sometimes bigger than 1 second (initial arm time). I would suggest trading this passive for a passive in which the trap would become camouflaged after a few seconds (add to the hunter class fantasy, making traps more useful)
2. Air Strike
Very underwhelming ability, as it's not quick enough for it to be a mobility skill, not enough damage for it to be worth the time you spend on air, and the root is not very effective. I think this ability should have a boost in damage, and a distance traveled increase, and its animation speed should be tied to either the player's attack or move speed.
3. Raining death
I think it is too OP. It does 200~240% damage and applies 2 stacks of wounds in a huge area. You could max stack wounds for a whole party with 5 rangers in 2 seconds.
It needs its AoE Size and reach reduced for sure. Maybe something with a ground template before we shoot, so we can aim.
4. Vines
Also, too OP. It needs an AoE size reduction by quite a lot.
5. Hunts and ammo
Completely underwhelming design. You'll only choose one of those, and you'll stick with it. It's not a class mechanic at all. It doesn't reward you for playing your role, it doesn't create a mechanical complexity, it just fails completely.
Right now, we have 3 Hunts, all offensive. The main issue is that the situational advantage of the Hunts is not good enough to warrant ppl to use multiple. If you are making a crit build, you'll only use the crit Hunts. If you're building penetration, you'll stick with the Hunts of the bear. Hunts of the Raven is used by ppl who are building for attack speed. Either way, you won't be switching Hunts realistically, especially since you spend skill points on the Hunts. Ammo can be a bit more diverse, but since they require an animation, are not off GCD, and require skill points to spec, it's not worth picking more than one. That's fine if these were simple buffs and not the whole "class mechanic" situation.
6. Missing abilities
I'd like to see some melee abilities on the ranger. Rangers should have some tools when it comes to hand-to-hand combat. They should be able to disarm an opponent, push them away, maybe trip them. Not enough damage (initially in the base archetype) to be a melee DPS, but enough tools to feel like they can handle themselves in a brawl.
I'd also love to see Rangers have a tracking tool. Footprints, scents, and any way a ranger can track a player in the region would be cool.
Rangers should also have poison arrows and the ability to cleanse poison (on themselves and others).
General Issues (TLDR)
Ranger's "class mechanics" are very lackluster, the skill ceiling is very low, and the class fantasy is not present
Reasoning
I think the ranger is in a very balanced state. It has decent single-target damage, decent AoE damage, decent mobility, decent utility, decent sustain, and decent CCs.
My biggest problem with Ranger is not that the class is weak, as I don't think it is (I don't think Ranger is weak compared to Mage, I think Mage is just too OP rn). My biggest problem with Ranger is that I believe it lacks in both class fantasy and mechanical complexity/skill ceiling.
You usually choose one mark and one hunt and stick with it. The same thing goes for ammo enhancement.
he ranger lacks in its ability to be more of a long-range killing machine, which is one of the main class fantasies of a ranger archetype. The Mage's abilities have the same range as practically all the Rangers' abilities. The ranger is not rewarded for being able to snare/root a mage and then increasing the distance and having that distance advantage. If you are hitting the Mage, the Mage will be hitting you with the same full force. And that goes for classes like bard and cleric as well. Not to mention, this game right now has a ton of mobility throughout all archetypes, and a universal mobility ability (dodge) that can close that gap super quickly. So, even the abilities that have a small range advantage on the ranger are meaningless, as that gap is closed very quickly.
Last but not least, Ranger is not only an archer/sniper type of archetype. Ranger class fantasy is of the hunter, the tracker. Some abilities for that are present, but either fall short or are missing elements to make it work/feel good.
1. Bear trap
Trap Slinger passive is useless, as the time for the trap to land is sometimes bigger than 1 second (initial arm time). I would suggest trading this passive for a passive in which the trap would become camouflaged after a few seconds (add to the hunter class fantasy, making traps more useful)
2. Air Strike
Very underwhelming ability, as it's not quick enough for it to be a mobility skill, not enough damage for it to be worth the time you spend on air, and the root is not very effective. I think this ability should have a boost in damage, and a distance traveled increase, and its animation speed should be tied to either the player's attack or move speed.
3. Raining death
I think it is too OP. It does 200~240% damage and applies 2 stacks of wounds in a huge area. You could max stack wounds for a whole party with 5 rangers in 2 seconds.
It needs its AoE Size and reach reduced for sure. Maybe something with a ground template before we shoot, so we can aim.
4. Vines
Also, too OP. It needs an AoE size reduction by quite a lot.
5. Hunts and ammo
Completely underwhelming design. You'll only choose one of those, and you'll stick with it. It's not a class mechanic at all. It doesn't reward you for playing your role, it doesn't create a mechanical complexity, it just fails completely.
Right now, we have 3 Hunts, all offensive. The main issue is that the situational advantage of the Hunts is not good enough to warrant ppl to use multiple. If you are making a crit build, you'll only use the crit Hunts. If you're building penetration, you'll stick with the Hunts of the bear. Hunts of the Raven is used by ppl who are building for attack speed. Either way, you won't be switching Hunts realistically, especially since you spend skill points on the Hunts. Ammo can be a bit more diverse, but since they require an animation, are not off GCD, and require skill points to spec, it's not worth picking more than one. That's fine if these were simple buffs and not the whole "class mechanic" situation.
6. Missing abilities
I'd like to see some melee abilities on the ranger. Rangers should have some tools when it comes to hand-to-hand combat. They should be able to disarm an opponent, push them away, maybe trip them. Not enough damage (initially in the base archetype) to be a melee DPS, but enough tools to feel like they can handle themselves in a brawl.
I'd also love to see Rangers have a tracking tool. Footprints, scents, and any way a ranger can track a player in the region would be cool.
Rangers should also have poison arrows and the ability to cleanse poison (on themselves and others).
Imnotkio
5
Re: Node Siege System Why Tho?
You're absolutely right to share your thoughts and feedback on the different features of the game. My message was mainly to inform you and "reassure" you that these features will be significantly improved in the coming months 🙂
Imanek
1
Re: Econ-Friday Ranting (a Reference Post)
Been a while since this idea was relevant to bring up, but since this is the reference post I won't make a new one.
So for those tracking, I think we got the answer, though I'm hesitant to 'draw a conclusion from an indirect one', the last Dev Stream indicated that there will definitely be even more focus on Caravans, and that there will be 'Special Commodities' in farther naval ports.
For any remaining '10K' Econ 'fans', Throne and Liberty has moved considerably further in that direction and things are good over there. For the unfortunates who really want Ashes style combat with 10K style Economy, you'll probably have to wait a few more years for something else, my sympathies.
So for those tracking, I think we got the answer, though I'm hesitant to 'draw a conclusion from an indirect one', the last Dev Stream indicated that there will definitely be even more focus on Caravans, and that there will be 'Special Commodities' in farther naval ports.
For any remaining '10K' Econ 'fans', Throne and Liberty has moved considerably further in that direction and things are good over there. For the unfortunates who really want Ashes style combat with 10K style Economy, you'll probably have to wait a few more years for something else, my sympathies.
Azherae
1
Re: Let's TheoryRaid #7: Lightning Dynamism (and Player Expectations?)
Good(?) news for me and other MMO PvE fans!
They're further along than I thought they were!
This isn't at Leviathan, but it's probably just a test, and it makes 'just as much sense in the location we found it in'.
So technically, to reference the original point, now that I've seen this test, I will still be disappointed if there's no Lightning Dynamism in Throne and Liberty, but I will also give them the same 'pass' I give to Intrepid. These things can sometimes be much harder to realize than they seem at the start.
So, my group 'finding a thunderstorm test on Live' is actually a buffer to my disappointment, believe it or not. I will still be disappointed, but knowing that someone wanted to try is heartening. I guess that's what I want this post to convey to Intrepid Devs.
No matter how often your attempts to realize a design turn out to be disappointing, we'll be rooting for you (though sometimes honestly it is better to stay silent than to kick up a fuss about the many designs you seem to actually be doing wrong).
Even blatant mistakes can be forgiven by fans. Just... y'know... fix them and take the lumps rather than doubling down. More of an encouragement post than directly related to the OP, I guess, but might as well post it anyway.
They're further along than I thought they were!
This isn't at Leviathan, but it's probably just a test, and it makes 'just as much sense in the location we found it in'.
So technically, to reference the original point, now that I've seen this test, I will still be disappointed if there's no Lightning Dynamism in Throne and Liberty, but I will also give them the same 'pass' I give to Intrepid. These things can sometimes be much harder to realize than they seem at the start.
So, my group 'finding a thunderstorm test on Live' is actually a buffer to my disappointment, believe it or not. I will still be disappointed, but knowing that someone wanted to try is heartening. I guess that's what I want this post to convey to Intrepid Devs.
No matter how often your attempts to realize a design turn out to be disappointing, we'll be rooting for you (though sometimes honestly it is better to stay silent than to kick up a fuss about the many designs you seem to actually be doing wrong).
Even blatant mistakes can be forgiven by fans. Just... y'know... fix them and take the lumps rather than doubling down. More of an encouragement post than directly related to the OP, I guess, but might as well post it anyway.
Azherae
2