Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
So you would send the whole node full of players down a narrow corridor through a dungeon to aid in a stealth exercise of espionage ?
Every groups size has a purpose, a time and a place. A playstyle glove that fits them perfect. Solo, small group, war party or army. Whats been missing from MMOS is not the ability to play solo, small group or a whole alliance. Whats been missing is making them mutually dependant, so that the endeavours of the few are the endeavours of the whole. Its about getting all group sizes working together on tasks that make perfect sense for their size.
You dont use massive numbers for stealthy activity. You dont use a bunch of individuals for coordinated warfare. Denying specialist playstyles is not the answer. Do you think any modern military does no use small surgical strike teams or spies and only uses battalions for everything ?
No. You use the right tool for the right job. For mutual benefit rather than personal benefit. With a strong emphasis on 'mutual benefit'.
Yes (as you say) every group size has its own use. Do you realize that people in this thread want to prevent large size groups from even existing in AoC?
That would be like saying yes every group size has it's purpose, but we want the game without large sized guilds because we don't want to play this part of game (where large guilds serve their purpose) and we don't care if others want to play that part of game. Do not let guilds be large, or significantly nerf them, while boosting guild size that fits part of game that I MYSELF want to play.
In ArcheAge right now there are single guilds that completely run the servers economy because they swipe their credit cards get the best gear in the game and ruin the game for everyone else. It kills crafting if you are not in one of their guilds or certified alliance guilds because there are critical crafting mats that you can only get from Auroria. These guilds control everything on Auroira and will do what ever it takes to remove people from this continent who they dont want there. This drives people to either quit or join their guild even though they are in a 20 to 30 man guild that does other things. They are not playing SOLO they just dont want to be apart of a mega guild that controls the server so their game play is hindered.
The problem the OP brings up is a good one. What if 1 guild has thousands of members and so much power that unless you are in their guild they can make it so you cannot do anything even if you are in a guild of your own playing with other people? For example they run all of the level 6 nodes and watch every person bringing caravans into these cities. If you are not a certified member of the guild or an ally you will get blocked every time. Even if you have 10 friends helping you out, the guild can bring countless people to stop you.
Its a very valid argument because it does happen on other games. No one is talking about making this a solo game, HOWEVER you are trying to dumb this argument down to the most foolish level without listening.
If its one large guild controls 1 node, I dont care because I will go somewhere else I will work with other people. There is a possibility of other large guilds laying waste to this one guild. But when its a Mega guild that controls an entire server there is a problem.
If AoC turns out to be balanced such that one established guild can stamp out all nodes before they advance to Metro stage, then there is no way to challenge the alpha guild...no matter how many organized players may team up to "challenge".
Literally NOBODY is saying solo players should be able to topple large guilds. Your ability to turn an argument against a straw man is unparalleled.
1. No P2W to swipe credit cards to get influence
2. no fast travel times
Without fast travel times 1 guild (no matter how large it is) can not just simply bring all of its members quickly to every single spot in the world where they are needed.
This means that other smaller guilds that organize and pick times and places for conflict will always win battles against this large guild because they will always outnumber them on places that are currently a point of conflict.
It's supposedly going to take weeks for a node to reach the Town stage. It will then take many more weeks to reach Metro. They won't exactly be doing that in secret, and it won't take a large guild weeks to mobilize a force to wipe the Town before it becomes a Metro.
Nice attempt at shifting from the "solo players should not compete with large guilds" straw man argument to the "don't worry about it, large guilds won't be a problem" argument though.
To clarify, metal, or resources for that matter won't be a fixed predefined place on every single server. This is not WoW/Tera/<insert whatever mmo you want> where the highest level zone has the highest level metal that you can reach with an instant teleport(this in itself "highest level metal" is already not present in AoC it's component based crafting, not tier based).
So to hug all this "god-level" metal, you would have to find it first. Let's just take the worst possible route and say your so called destructive mega guild that somehow managed to get 5k no life players and somehow manages to please all of them to continue working for them. Let's just, somehow, assume that. (Your experience in a 100 people server already confirmed that this is very likely after all)
Now those god-players want to be the absolute twat to everybody and shit on everyone finds one such "god-level" metal and develop their city there. It's in the middle of the map so travel time to every part of the realm is "minimal". (Oh I love this already)
Let's assume for the sake of worst case scenario that there is only and only this one deposit of metal in the entire world, which is unlikely, but I will humor your delusion.
So what now, you have the grandest metal and since it's a worst case scenario you somehow have both the highest level processing facilities and crafting facilities in your own god-city. (which again is actually not possible as information was provided. You need several cities for the best outcome as well as possible trade runs to enhance your materials. Last part about trade runs is not 100% confirmed that it will end up like this , but they are thinking along those lines to give processors incentives)
The thing is, you don't need only metal to craft, you need god-level wood, god-level leather, god-level monster materials, god-level plants.
This is the worst case scenario and somehow all those materials somehow ended up in walking distance of your god-level city and Intrepid Studio doesn't give a shit that their procedural generation made that happen and just let it run like that. You and your mega zerg guild is the god of the server and dominate everything around them with overwhelming skill and gear. (Well actually just gear because zergs don't need skill and high leveled mechanically skilled players love to run in a blobb, but they have the skill too, just in an emergency case)
Thing is, those materials you needed to equip your 5 thousand hardcore no-life members actually never were enough for all of them.. but it's the worst case scenario so of course you had enough and of course you have enough god-level material stockpiled up to repair it all forever and ever since your deposits never ran out of materials (Do I even need to say at this point how ludicrous that is? It goes against base design ideas and allure of the game).
So against all odds, there is this super awesome god land of gods in the middle of the map and they somehow prevent every other city across the entire landmass from rising up (This is hilarious, did you even watch a single stream? The magnitude of scale, the siege mechanic every base design makes this impossible already).
No new content will be unlocked, nothing happens aside from the bashing of low scrub players who can't put up a fight cause 5k players will steamroll over every handfull of people in the entire game world.
They are happy to earn the rewards of keeping the god land of gods up and running since those rewards are just THE BEST THING EVAA. They have all 5 castles. No-one even tries anymore and they absolutely enjoy this status quo.
5 thousand players migrate away from the server to somewhere else where they somehow meet the same fate, so 5 thousand players of each server stop playing while the other half absolutely enjoys their god lands.
I deliberately took 5k as the equilibrium since even if they have less actual members, they obviously have side spy accounts taking up a population slot, but account is account and they have to keep using it to see if someone new arrives in their god land and might try to usurper them. If it's less the word will get out to other god level player who want to be part of it and it will reach equilibrium at about 5k again. If there were actually far less people like this then there would be servers where this won't happen and it plays in your definition "normal" and no one would have a problem.
So half the accounts go void, but the other half absolutely love it this way unconditionally, keeping their organization intact so they will continue to play this way forever, maybe even migrate to a new city once in a while cause they feel like it or start making tournaments between themselves around castles even if they don't they continue to play because they love it apparently, otherwise this worst case scenario can't exist which makes this whole thing pointless and your argument void.
Either way it's still a lot of people per server that love the game. Sucks for you but 5 thousand others per server love it.
Conclusion: This is just not a game for you and instead of ranting about it and make it the way YOU selfish prick want it, you should let those other 5 thousand people enjoy it.
This was the worst case scenario, >>for you<< and as the conclusion said you have no place in this world since apparently you only fight the development of such a game to fit your own selfish needs presented on a silver plate and spoon fed to you but wouldn't fight in the game to make it the way you want. Which would denying the enjoyment of other people that way who will in turn go ranting about how unfair it is that they can't enjoy the game the way they want it. Looks like either way, someone is going to be unhappy. That is, if this worst case scenario were true.
I had fun and laughed a lot writing this. Thank you for sparking this idea built on your continued ignorance against us fanbois who actually bothered to listen/read the information we got over the last year.
As a side note, a quick search showed that Ark holds steady on player count for 3 years now and that's just steam, not counting private servers and ps4 which obviously exist too, just as another note for "who are you to deny a game for a player group that you do not belong to". They don't destroy the game, the game just fits them better. : P
4 pages of continued ignorance and I bet that my opinion as a "fanboiiiiiii" is imply invalid and won't even be bothered to be counter argued against.
:rofl:
Damn! I thought my text walls were intense.
Most points were valid, though I take exception to some of it.
Most people are inherently lazy and leave organization upto other people.
Thats why we have elected representatives that we let shit all over us.
Most people always try to mix with the masses as peer pressure is a thing.
And like physics itself, everything pretty much follows the path of least resistance because resistance often invokes a bad day and who wants to be miserable right ?
vis-a-vis...theres always some power crazed messiah at the top of the pyramid trying to rule the world, manipulating henchman who make it much easier to be in the group then outside of it. And to be allowed in the group means toeing the line.
So taking nothing away from your very valid points, there will always be an issue with dominance and hierarchy.
What a large guild could do is control the caravans into their level 6 nodes with little effort. If the only time to run caravans is at 4am in the morning like ArcheAge with the trade packs people just will not play. Who that works 40 hours a week wants to get up at 4am to play a video game when you have to work 8 hours a day? This was a major problem with AA. The other faction would sit near the trade in NPC and just kill people who were trying to trade their packs in. This same problem happened on Freedrich, it was only very early in the morning were people able to trade their packs in on Freedrich. I remember one time there was over 100 pirates sitting next to the NPC waiting for the trade packs to come in.
I think you dont really understand how MMORPGS work today. 14 years ago people would go out in to the world and do things today they are so dam lazy they want to sit in a city hit a button and join a group. These are the same people that in AA will sit on Freedrich next to the NPC and wait to trade packs instead of getting on a ship and fighting for the trade packs. In Ashes I can see a guild just having people sitting around the level 6 node and attack trade packs. While if its 1 or large guilds its not a big deal. If its a mega guild that controls a server its a problem for everyone else.
Its foolish not to question developers at every stage of the development process because when you get people like you who act as if everything is perfect and nothing is wrong you get a shitty product. Look at SOTA and you will see a dead ass game because people like you who kissed the developments ass, flamed anyone who brought up any concerns. And now they are begging for people to play their product on the MMORPG.com forums. Yet when you say you dont like the game design they flame you for it.
I agree with some of the things you say. Players should play together. We shouldnt try to restrict large guilds. However when you think that a server controlling guild is OK we already seen this in an MMORPG and people quit because of it. That is not healthy game play which is what I want. I dont care that I will have to fight of PVPers from my caravan. What I will dislike is if I cannot be in my own guild with 30 to 100 members and do stuff because one guild has 1000 or more members where you are just a number to control the server. That will just make it so I will just move on. You trying to say it will be OK well the same was said about AA and its castle system, and that game is having massive problems. The Only think that keeps that game afloat is shutting down servers and starting over fresh where the whales can spend $10,000 each to control a server. Its no better then Evony.
Not disagreeing at all, most people don't want to have all this administrative work, but most people also seek the fun. Which again leads only to two possible outcomes, either this huge 5k organization is a semi-/happy one where an equilibrium is struck between being happy and just being able to play at all and won't fall apart leading back to the conclusion or it does fall apart.
The conclusion is obviously a little sarcastic and over simplified, but I don't think that I am off the mark in general. I am sure we have all seen big and small guilds, friendships and friend circles fall apart over the most random and minor things even tho it was a great guild/ bunch of friends with lots of happy history. Doesn't even have to be game related.
I'm just cracking up every time this guy comes in and thinks it's easy to keep even 200 people happy at once in a single focused community. Hey his "100 server max population where 30 high end equip people on a tiny map can dominate everything"- scenario just extrapolates directly linear to a 10k server setting.
Obviously. I love this guy, always makes my day a bit brighter.
Lets say you have a population of 100,000 players all subscription players. After 3 or 4 months you see a Mega guild control every server because they each have about 1000 players and there are 10 servers. The 90,000 other players want nothing to do with just being a number in the guild. The vast majority of this player base much like todays MMORPG player base wants to play in smaller groups, a handful of players to maybe 100 players. This is exactly what happens in AA, hundreds of players bitch about the Alliances that run their servers but refuse to waste time fighting back because there is no way to coordinate the numbers needed to fight back.
So what happens. The vast majority of the 90K players quit the game, so lets say you lose 80K subs. Thats great you have your Mega guild run paradise. The Developers no longer are making 1.5 Million Dollars a month they are making $300,000 a month not enough to keep developers paid and pay for the servers. Well what do you think is going to happen. If Steven's comments are correct he would rather shut down a game then go P2W. Well Ashes shuts down and the casual WOW fans win and prove that no other game than WOW works and the MMORPG genera continues to stagnate for another 10 years. All because someone like you that thinks in some fantasy world the majority of players will fight back against Mega guilds like they did in lineage 2 back in 2003. Dude you have blinders on. You really do. Back in 2003 people didnt have instant gratification now they do. Do you think you can go back to 100% old school game play and be successful? The answer is NO. I played MMORPGS since 1998 I understand how MMORPGS use to be. You cannot take todays MMORPG crowd and put them in 2003. You just cannot.
What you need to do is balance todays crowd with some old school game play. No you dont need the WOW crowd but making it so a group of 30 people do not have their game play shut down due to 1000 people. If I cannot play in my guild of 50 to 100 people because some Mega guild completely controls the server, I am not joining them I am just not going to play. Saying Ok then like I said you will have the vast majority of the player base do the same shit. This only shuts your game down or makes it P2W to keep it running.
Its Foolish to think that Mega guilds controlling a server is a good thing. Every game that tries that ends up failing. This is not 2003.
Anyone who cant amass the same numbers must lose....so why play when you have 0 chance of competing ?
Also, I might have lost it after trying to read this thread in one go, but it seems a lot of you are assuming those mega guilds will work as one which I find highly unlikely. As @Grisu already said, if a player has to waste hours of time to travel to a siege or something similar, a lot of them will probably not bother. Not to mention that several hundreds of individual players with their own individual agendas coming together in a guild there most definitely WILL be some sort of drama or infighting and people just doing their own thing.
As well as you other people with your invalid "opinions" <jokemode off>
Its actually not that hard to fight zergs. They are usually very simple and rely on a single commander. GW2 ,if nothing else, was an amazing playground to demonstrate that. 5 to 1 on a borderland? Have no group just coordinate through chat whoever is willing to listen and boom after 20 minutes double side castles taken over and steamrolled the rest of the map. You have so many possibilities to outmanover them to the point it becomes a joke to watch. You can even directly confront them if you do it right and pick your fighting spot.
There was an amazing video of 4 people fighting on a chokepoint vs 30 people. They didnt wipe them out completly but killed more than half of them.
It was a great showchase of zergmentality. Running around for 4 people and not organizing themselves.
Gw2 was a great experiment for me to test around and i will have lots of fun against those zergs. Proven again and again there and will do again in ashes.
Numbers mean nothing in fact it often creates the illusion of surpiriority and loosens attention.
Omg i just noticed helzbelt! Nice now the trolling will go highwire. <prepares chips> didn't know you are still around and already completly create drama on shit noone said. Love it
Smaller guilds are more coherent, more friendly, smaller community, better friendships.
Large guilds of 1000 people+, most people don't even know each other, let alone consider each other friends.
So when there is trouble, and someone needs help:
- smaller guilds, everyone jumps to help a friend in need
- bigger guilds, "nah i am doing my grinding, there is 1000 people in here someone else will help him", specially if travel is needed to reach that location
In end, smaller guilds will work together much better then large guilds, and if few smaller guilds allie together, they will for sure be stronger then one large guild where members don't care about other members as much.
With no fast travel times involved, and smaller guilds having easier times organizing themselves, too large guilds have no chance.
(also about that alt accounts - lol - smaller guilds can also have alt accounts...)
All this considered, I actually think large guilds need help boosting their ability to organize, rather then any form of nerf.
Of course, that means the devs have to deliver this gigantic playable map. We will see how they progress on that front fairly early in the alpha/beta process.
The point of having alt accounts is that it allows a guild like Alea Iacta Est to circumvent game imposed caps on the number of players, so they have 2000+ members in WoW across 11 co-guilds as they call them. They are not the oldest but they have been around since 2007. Here is a link to their website if you want more info: https://aie-guild.org/
I personally prefer smaller guilds, which is why this is a concern for me. I don't see any new info posted on the nodes, but I did want to respond to this point. Hopefully they will release something with the anniversary coming up.
then they die
node dies / switches hands
repeat
It's not at all concerning and plays perfectly into the game mechanically and lore wise
If a large group of dedicated players can devote the time and resources to doing something in a game about players influencing the overall game state than absolutely they should be able to
As the larger guild/alliance dwindles the node will die. If it doesn't, thats a testament to the work theyve put in and it becomes an (almost) permanent location + historic landmark. Both of these options are good.
Well the point I made earlier is that they don't all die. I think it depends on how well they function. This game will also give a lot more incentives for people to organize and form large entities. This is already obvious by the posts in the guild recruiting forum on this website.
The problem I have with this system is that it seems to favor large guilds. It's also clear that those who control the nodes will be able to gain the most from them, they will control the benefits. So I am thinking that those who are not part of the group in control will suffer. It's not a problem if we all want to be part of a larger group, but some players may want to organize in smaller units.
An easy fix, and I mean super super easy, population caps on guilds. 200 people including alts is way more than enough to keep one group from deciding everything.
It would be epic.