Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Phase III testing has begun! During this phase, our realms will be open every day, and we'll only have downtime for updates and maintenance. We'll keep everyone up-to-date about downtimes in Discord.
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 Phase III testing has begun! During this phase, our realms will be open every day, and we'll only have downtime for updates and maintenance. We'll keep everyone up-to-date about downtimes in Discord.
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: More Lawless Areas? or Just Flag/War/Red PK ?
PvE players constantly trying to change any game that designed for or with PvP in mind in basicly every game that comes along, god forbid a game isnt designed as them as the target audience.
PvP players constantly trying to change any game that designed for or with PvE in mind in basicly every game that comes along, god forbid a game isnt designed as them as the target audience.
Works both ways.
Ashes at its core is supposed to be as much about PvE as PvP. PvP is supposed to be a catalyst for change, but building is all about PvE.
There should be more to build than there is to change, as everything changed needs to first be built - thus Ashes should be PvE first, if we have to assume one comes before the other (I don't, I assume they are of equal importance, just pointing out that if Ashes is primarily one, it has to be the one that builds, not the one that changes).
The current state of the game is due to PvP players/posters whining, not PvE players/posters.
The notion in the OP - lawless areas with better rewards all around - will just result in those lawless areas being all about bringing as many people you can and demolishing said lawless areas. That is what any game like Ashes with that content will become.
Realistically, all that needs to be done is the threshold for dropping gear when killed while corrupt needs to be raised a small amount. If players know they can kill one or two players before they risk losing gear, those precious PvP players that don't want that risk should still be able to PvP.
Personally, I think they should stop being so precious, but that is just me. PvP players are such whiners.
Noaani
2
Re: More Lawless Areas? or Just Flag/War/Red PK ?
I'm truly saddened by the fact that as time goes on, I expect we're going to see more and more push for Ashes to be more like this.
"I hate being right."
Every single datapoint I have from every single game that tries to appeal with features that aren't focused on PvP and then provides more 'Lawless Area' style gameplay is that everything goes to shit within 3... MAYBE 4 months.
Except Throne and Liberty, ofc, where you can watch the outcomes of their mistakes within a week or two since the playerbase is large enough to actually see the trends quickly.
So I'll offer the data from that one.
Adding a Lawless Area with a time limit, that was absolutely optional to go to even economically in most ways, plus an item that you could buy to recharge your time (started at 6h weekly) resulted in large guild/group domination of areas.
To put that in perspective, PvP players with 'too much time' literally spent economic progress (which they genuinely didn't make that much of after a while since the price of most easy drops from that zone tanked, as they also would in an Ashes-style economy, even faster) to just keep PvP-ing.
Whether their intent was to lock down the zones or not is not relevant. The explicit aim of giving the time limit was to do a sort of 'soft matchmaking'. Eventually the dominant groups would run out of time and leave, particularly if they were all 'having fun fighting each other' they would be more likely to leave at similar times. This did not happen. I feel that most L2 players could have told them this would not happen. They have since removed the ability to 'Buy more time', which adds a nice soft downward pressure on the problem, but the perceptive outcome lingers (less PvP-casuals willing to engage with the content).
Lawless zones in Ashes are exactly the equivalent of this, but with no real cost, and automatic economic progression that isn't subject to the drag that TL has built into it. I am 100% against the colossal design mistake of 'adding a rewarding Lawless area that is always accessible/always Lawless' in Ashes of Creation.
"I hate being right."
Every single datapoint I have from every single game that tries to appeal with features that aren't focused on PvP and then provides more 'Lawless Area' style gameplay is that everything goes to shit within 3... MAYBE 4 months.
Except Throne and Liberty, ofc, where you can watch the outcomes of their mistakes within a week or two since the playerbase is large enough to actually see the trends quickly.
So I'll offer the data from that one.
Adding a Lawless Area with a time limit, that was absolutely optional to go to even economically in most ways, plus an item that you could buy to recharge your time (started at 6h weekly) resulted in large guild/group domination of areas.
To put that in perspective, PvP players with 'too much time' literally spent economic progress (which they genuinely didn't make that much of after a while since the price of most easy drops from that zone tanked, as they also would in an Ashes-style economy, even faster) to just keep PvP-ing.
Whether their intent was to lock down the zones or not is not relevant. The explicit aim of giving the time limit was to do a sort of 'soft matchmaking'. Eventually the dominant groups would run out of time and leave, particularly if they were all 'having fun fighting each other' they would be more likely to leave at similar times. This did not happen. I feel that most L2 players could have told them this would not happen. They have since removed the ability to 'Buy more time', which adds a nice soft downward pressure on the problem, but the perceptive outcome lingers (less PvP-casuals willing to engage with the content).
Lawless zones in Ashes are exactly the equivalent of this, but with no real cost, and automatic economic progression that isn't subject to the drag that TL has built into it. I am 100% against the colossal design mistake of 'adding a rewarding Lawless area that is always accessible/always Lawless' in Ashes of Creation.
Azherae
2
Alpha Two Update Notes 0.9.0 - Friday, April 25, 2025
These are the update notes for changes to the Alpha Two that went to testers on Friday, April 25, 2025
As a reminder, if you come across bugs during Alpha Two testing, please report them to us in-game using /bug
KNOWN ISSUES
ALPHA TWO UPDATE NOTES 0.9.0 - FRIDAY, APRIL 25, 2025
HIGHLIGHTS
POCKET DUNGEONS
NODES
NODE SIEGE
ENEMIES & NPCs
QUESTS, EVENTS & COMMISSIONS
ECONOMY & ARTISANSHIP
GENERAL
As a reminder, if you come across bugs during Alpha Two testing, please report them to us in-game using /bug
KNOWN ISSUES
- Treasure maps and faded treasure map pieces only drop for the Riverlands, regardless of where you get them
- Bloomed Maw and Lost Abyss pocket dungeons are too dark during night time on high and ultra settings
ALPHA TWO UPDATE NOTES 0.9.0 - FRIDAY, APRIL 25, 2025
HIGHLIGHTS
- Jundark is now available! This zone includes new gatherables, recipes, rewards, pocket dungeons, enemies, treasure maps, events, and mounts!
POCKET DUNGEONS
- Jundark pocket dungeons are now available! These are Kraken's Belly, Lost Abyss, Pools of Stench, The Bloomed Maw, The Hollow Oracle, The Murmuring Root, The Pit of Golgora, Verdance Ruins, and Web Well
- Stone Hold pocket dungeon will now unlock when Squall’s End Node reaches stage 1
- Communion pocket dungeon will now unlock when Squall’s End Node reaches stage 2
- Apothecarium Dreadmire pocket dungeon will now unlock when Djinna Node reaches stage 2
- The Gypsum Outpost pocket dungeon will now unlock when Djinna Node reaches stage 3
- Lighting has been updated in the following pocket dungeons: Apothecarium Dreadmire, Communion, Lost Hero's Sepulcher, Scarabsong Hollow, Snakebite Stash, Stone Hold, The Brood Pit, The Gypsum Outpost, The Prismarium, Vault of The Emigrant
- Multrok's Fall floor has been fixed so it will no longer flicker visually
NODES
- New Nodes have been added to the Turquoise Sea! Seahook, Windansea and Shorefoot can now advance to Node stage 3
- Turquoise Sea Buy Orders and Mayoral Commissions have been added to Seahook, Windansea and Shorefoot
- New Turquoise Sea Node Commodities have been added
- Korrin and Brinebarrel are part of the PvP lawless area
- Service building construction will now show character names for who contributed towards construction
- Made several UI improvements to Node menus
- Sunhaven Node - Fixed a collision bug with trees
- Djinna Node - Fixed a few visual bugs with buildings
NODE SIEGE
- Characters will no longer be at war with the opposing Node Siege team until the preparation phase for the event begins
- Mounts can no longer be summoned during active Node Sieges
- Siege gate health has been reduced by 10%
- Reduced lag caused by character ash loot piles
- Capture progress on control points can now be recovered by the team controlling this
- Teleports during Sieges are now more reliable
- Siege is now supported in Coastal Nodes
- Improved reliability of siege objectives spawning and despawning
- Siege Preparation phase duration has been reduced to 3 minutes
- Increased the wave respawn timer, so the maximum time is 45 seconds
ENEMIES & NPCs
- Tumok the Wretched’s patrol route has been adjusted, to prevent him from getting stuck in some places in the Riverlands
- More Node Guards will now use ranged attacks to hit targets they can’t hit with melee attacks
- Rafflesia enemies should now properly drop loot
QUESTS, EVENTS & COMMISSIONS
- Turquoise Sea kill commission rarity has been updated to reflect the challenge involved. Additionally, the commission locations that appear on the map will now display the correct location names
- Eyes in the Canopy event can now be completed
- Rotting Grotto commission text has been updated to have the correct names of the enemies required to complete this
- Scathing Severthorn event NPCs should stop spawning after this event is complete
ECONOMY & ARTISANSHIP
- Deconstructing Novice gear should now correctly give the correct Glintic Residuum for tempering, depending on what type of item you deconstruct
- Dun’mor Helm recipe has been fixed and is now available in the Armor Smithing station
- Treasure maps should no longer be able to be used as Enchanting scrolls
- Harvesting Seaweed now has a visual effect
GENERAL
- Lawless zones now provide a buff that gives bonus XP and luck
- Added material storage to Freeholds
- All open seas are now lawless PvP areas
- Added one new harbor in the Riverlands, and two new harbors in the Sandsquall Desert. The locations for these harbors have been added to the map
- Made improvements to how characters and mounts render in high density situations
- Fixed some holes in the world that characters could fall into
- Rogue Archetype has been added to Party and Raid Menu so people can set the color for them
- Map in the Turquoise Sea shows the zone of influence for each Node
- Visual improvements to the coastal water in several areas of the world
- Updated some icons
Roshen
3
Re: Why Exclusive Flying Mounts Will Destroy a PvP-Driven Game Long Term
While I do think flying mounts overall are bad for any MMO with open world PvP , if they absolutely need to have them, just have it where you cant fly as a combatant and straight up lose the flying mount if they go corrupted enough. Bare minimum this would at least keep players from being able to do solo drop in ganks undeterred like in WoW BC and WotLK. Terrible gameplay.
Dolyem
1
Re: Why Exclusive Flying Mounts Will Destroy a PvP-Driven Game Long Term
Now we are talking
1. max number of attackers/defenders in guild wars/ node wars/ siege wars. Like i know that at the moment its 100vs100. But their plans is to change this. And if they make it 500vs500 or 1kvs1k - this wont be something achievable with small guilds, you will include bunch of randomz that you will never be able to organize in a good attack/defense. So for me 100vs100 / 200vs200 for node wars and 300vs300 for castle sieges should the limit.
2. Limit the use of fly mounts or give ways for players to counter them. Fly mounts can be only usable in declared wars as a pvp utility which wont affect the everyday life of average players, or you should give crafting items and stuff to players to fight with fly mounts from the distance.
3. Anti zerg mechanics. This has been discussed a lot in a lot threads, but few simple examples would be:
* Aoe spells that scale with number of players hit. So if you hit 50+ players - you kill them all. Yes i know that this sounds brutal, but this wont make zergs completely vanish. They will just learn to position better, and only those that can be organized will survive
* Players from the same guild, BUT NOT IN SAME raid/party group should not be considered allies. Meaning if a zerg bring 2 groups x 40 players, if both groups are COMBATANTS, then they can hit each other and have "friendly fire"
4. Scaling reduce of exp/items drop/resource drop from mobs/bosses/gatherables with the number of players in the area. Not needed to be in same group. So even if you have 40 groups x 2 players each, the total count would still be 80 and this should reduce everyone's rewards gained BY A LOT.
5. Bosses should be more punishing when you bring a zerg. Just using their AOE spell more often wont be enough to stop zerg.
6. The small guild perks that you can choose that are opposing the guild number perks dont seem that will help much. (and yes i realize that this is early stage of this system and probably everything in it will change, but just putting it here as something that needs work on)
7. Majors should not be Zergable. At the moment all 4 types of node Majors can be zerged (only divine is question mark since it can be made so that zergs wont have advantage for it, but we shall see how they make it). For example - the Military Major should not be FFA tournament where the zerg will get 80% of the arena spots and will work together, But instead its 1v1/2v2/5v5 tournament. And if it is for example 2v2, then in the end you have 1 winning team of 2 players. Thay have final match of 1v1 and 1 of them becomes hte major the other some officer or something like this. For Economy node it can be some solo minigame simulation, where you are put in some fake scenario where you need to manage resources by trading and stuff like this and for example everyone participating have a score after 30 min of playtime and the highest score wins the major.
Science - IDK can even be an IQ test
. Or in the worst case it can be left as it is and having 1 node type major that is for zergs may not be that bad of a thing.And i think this should be enough to make the game more fair.
Githal
1
Re: Why Exclusive Flying Mounts Will Destroy a PvP-Driven Game Long Term
This game is for Pirate Software types. The flying mounts are a 'feature, not a flaw', for them, right?
Cant disagree with this. And not only for Pirate, this will be insane feature for all streamers that manage to get fly mount since this will increase their subscribers, since they will be showing something unique that no average player will ever have.
But still i strongly disagree that Intrepid should make the game for streamers and large guilds.
And not only "disagreement", I have the feeling that the game wont be as successful if they disregard smaller guilds as it could have been.
Like not that it gonna die if they care only for large guilds or anything, It still will be great game that many players will play, but it can be much more than this.
Githal
1
Re: Why Exclusive Flying Mounts Will Destroy a PvP-Driven Game Long Term
If group A has a flying mount user for scouting to check for people who might attack their caravans, group B would probably have a flying mount user to check for the caravans.
Here is the thing that you dont get. In your example both group A and B are some 1k member alliances that own metropolis or castle. And the other thing that you dont get is the mentality of those groups,
Because the sole purpose for people to join zerg guilds is to dominate territory/area/node or ect. Meaning they absolutely will avoid fights with another zerg group since this will break their sole purpose of "Free win".
The things with Pirate Software prove this. Have seen this countless times where the biggest groups ally or make non aggression pact.
And what this leaves us with? Those zerg groups still want some form of "action", even if its in the form of killing small groups and ect. And those groups wont have fly mounts obviously.
You say that there are other unfair things in Ashes, but there arent that many from game perspective.
Relics? - The counter part is intended to be small guild perks that boost small groups
Sea content? - even a solo player can get a ship
Githal
1
Re: Why Exclusive Flying Mounts Will Destroy a PvP-Driven Game Long Term
I totally agree with you. fly mount need to be reconsider
cancel that mount may be the best option
cancel that mount may be the best option
dkshaw
1
Re: Why Exclusive Flying Mounts Will Destroy a PvP-Driven Game Long Term
This topic could be about nearly anything. Flying mounts are just the representation of the basic issue.
Some people want more fairness than Ashes of Creation is designed to provide.
This game has open world bosses, player to player trading, situations where items drop but currency doesn't, and at least three situations that have persistent, recurring bonuses with no true responsibilities.
How are flying mounts even a real problem here? They're there almost specifically for the types of people who need them to compete with other players of similar levels of organization.
The 'oppressive nobles' in the types of story Ashes is close to, need some way to actually be oppressive nobles or you don't have a story. And if this game doesn't even have Node drama, what does it actually have?
Thats the problem. Too many things benefit Mega guilds and will have negative effect on smaller guilds.
But the problem with fly mounts is that - even tho the other things are unfair against the smaller groups - you still have the feeling that you are put in fair environment, and just the number of players on the opposite side is the difference that makes the disadvantage.
With fly mounts you are put in unfair environment since small groups will never have those. So this is the response from the community about unfair game mechanic that is exclusive to Large guilds.
Githal
1