Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Gathering Cluster Question
In reading the overview of how gathering clusters work, it states that once they are exhausted, it will respawn somewhere else in the world. Is that somewhere random anywhere on the map, or within that region.
I hope that resources are regional, so that certain nodes are more valuable because of the resources that are in the area. That would give a lot of weight to PvP and really make large scale wars worth something. It is also a way for the devs to subtly incite new battles. For instance they could add a new tier of weapons that use a new type of ore which makes the old resource less valuable and therefore everyone is now fighting for control over a different node.
I hope that resources are regional, so that certain nodes are more valuable because of the resources that are in the area. That would give a lot of weight to PvP and really make large scale wars worth something. It is also a way for the devs to subtly incite new battles. For instance they could add a new tier of weapons that use a new type of ore which makes the old resource less valuable and therefore everyone is now fighting for control over a different node.
0
Comments
"We really want resources to be persistent and non-renewable. If there’s a mithril vein, that mithril vein will be there until it runs out. The server will manage these amounts on its own, and will repopulate things where and when it desires. You might find another mithril vein in that location sometime later, or somewhere nearby, or maybe never again!"
In in my mind something as small as resource location can have a huge impact on the political/social makeup of a server.
I think having "roaming" resources will prevent one node from artificially being powerful for the entire life of the server due to having access to the most rare/valuable resource.
I really want the game map, especially nodes, to develop dynamically and change often. Having static resource points encourages gank squads / guild war hot spots / and monopolies. I don't think any of those things are needed to encourage meaningful PvP.
Gank squads can still flag a resource to gank gatherers.
Guild wars will still fight over resources currently in the Guild Castles ZOI.
Monopolies can occur with player driven crafts.
What is the actual benefit of everyone always knowing exactly where a certain resource is? Besides making the game easier.
If it was done in this way groups could level up nodes feeling reassured that their market of woodworking and metalworking would be safe and they could trade with wildlife-heavy zones for furs and other animal parts. Not that they couldn't find those in their own, just that they were so common in the other area that trading would be easier/faster.
Groups of people who feel that they "own" that resource will have similar experiences. While that silver mine located just outside your city gates is convenient and is all the rage for people trying to "sell" access, it too will become depleted and go poof. If you know that it is just going to spawn over the next hill in some set pattern it allows people to get into set habits of play, get bored with the game, and leave. Finding out "your" silver spawn has popped up 3 nodes over and it being utilized by "that other group we don't like." leads to all sorts of reason for conflict.
I really think keeping the entire world always relevant is very important.
Static resource locations means the games population becomes static, and the ONLY way to shake things up is for Intrepid to do as the OP suggested and add a new material - thus decreasing the value of all items in game at present (something Steven wan'ts to avoid).
If resources are dynamic, players going after those resources have to be dynamic as well.
My argument is that static resources would drive the game. Almost all game systems are built on resource scarcity. Each ZOI has resources natural to the terrain, to craft you will need resources from each area. Therefore crafters need to set up trade lines with the caravan system. PvPers will need to be hired to defend those supply lines.
The social aspect of the game could be very deep within this system. It would create strife from both outside and inside a node. For example, say a metropolis has two strong crafting guilds. Each want to limit the others market share, they will then hire others to attack the competitions caravans.
On a macro level, you will need to have allies in other ZOIs to get the supplies you need. If there is an attack on your allies in another ZOI, you will need to go protect them in order to keep your supply lines running. Or you could see how it plays out and make a new deal with whoever wins. It brings a whole new level of strategy, diplomacy and intrigue to the game.
Change is better, let us adapt our play styles to fit Ashes and stop trying to force Ashes into a box that is obviously not doing well.
Also rare nodes will be just that, rare. This isn't wow where a rare node means a handful up in each node and just having to follow your gathermate to every node until you find it and harvest a small amount just for it to respawn in a few minutes elsewhere.
Some resources will last a while and would benefit from constructs for gathering/collecting.
Also I'm a bit confused, are you complaining that resources would be too easy for you to get or that they are too prevalent? If there is too much supply then turn to processing or crafting and become part of the demand. Or are you complaining that once settlements are built you'd have all the workstations you'd need? You do understand that processing and crafting can only occur at specific work stations.. said work stations would be limited per node and freehold. So if your node is working on armor and weapon smithing as well as a foundry to make smelt ingots and other metal pieces you'd need to import the other components. And that'd require moving cloth, leather, dyes, and not only that; they'd need to be ready to assemble, so it'd have to be leather straps, belts, cloth insulation and padding, etc. Since we are limited to the number of crafting/processing stations we would have to trade with nearby people. And sometimes that means trading hundreds of pounds of metal goods to the places we are buying hundreds of pounds of other goods. Unless you want to trek across the zone to bring in enough materials to make your one crafted good, you'd want to deal in bulk.
I guess that just begs the question, how long a vein will last in general.
I'm not sure why that couldn't be done in Ashes with roaming resources. The only difference would be those gathering and running protection would occasionally have to move their set up. Is there something I am missing here?
So you may be in the metro node and now your trading partners have stopped sending you materials because they want to destroy you or a 3rd party has offered them a better deal. Or maybe you are the ones trading to them but you feel like you are being shorted because of their boons.. and your node wants to take them down. Or you are a 3rd party node and you are offering more gold to the outside traders to cripple the metro.
The goal this PvX game is to have PvE and PvP fairly balanced. To encourage everyone to take part in the entire game and to have content that drives each other. PvE and PvP levels nodes. Higher nodes benefit and create more PvE content while node competition encourages PvP
The economy is what would drive the most conflict on an everyday basis. Forcing nodes to trade across the map will create more political alliances and enemies. Say I am in mountain node 1, you are in forest node 3. We are trading partners, therefore the people in mountain node 2 and forest node 2 have a vested interest in stopping our caravans. In turn I have a real interest in helping you defend or topple the metro in your area. If that is the case you would see large sieges more often. Every 2 months there are several nodes across the server that want to help a partner across the map defend or siege a metropolis.
If my node can get all the resources I need in my ZOI, who cares what happens anywhere else on the map. Why would I dedicate funds and resources to help a node in another ZOI do anything.
The economic fates of the entire server need to be tied together, and that all comes back to how resources are allocated. If you depend on changing PVE content to drive PvP conflict, my guess is that many ZOIs will just rotate which metropolis’s are built every few months. That way you will get to see all the different Dev given content.
When you say regionalized do you mean exclusive? Like only the forest node will be able to produce lumber and only the mountain node will be able to produce ore?
I mean... they are. They've stated (very first line) that gathering will be natural/organic. You will only find resources where they are suppose to be. So while you'll be able to find a bit of everything everywhere if it makes sense, you'll still have to worry about harvest rates. If your self-produced supply is very low you will be forced to import to meet demand.
I want my metropolis to be the only one of it's flavor on the server, in order to maximize the value of it's specific bonus.
I want to weaken a guild that calls the target node home.
I am working on a grande scheme towards taking over a castle.
My guild is looking to move to a different area, and are weakening the node as to be ready for takeover.
I want access to content that the target node in it's current state has blocked.
I have a grande alliance that has the population to maintain two metropoles, and need to take down an existing metropolis in order to level up a nearby node.
I enjoy PvP.
---
All of that said, a metropolis being defeated in a siege is something that should be rare. It changes the face of the server for every player - not just those from that metropolis.
I mean, if you are on a server with a single trade metropolis and you have something valuable that you want to sell, you will take it to a node within that trade metropolis' ZOI to sell it, as the potential market is many times larger than any other market on the server. Likewise if you wish to buy something valuable, you'll look in a market attached to a trade metropolis if one is available to you.
While it may be rare for a metropolis to lose a siege, sieges themselves are not necessarily going to be rare things. Just because two players are citizens of nodes that fall under the ZOI of the same metropolis, doesn't mean they are automatically friends.
Citizens of a metropolis can declare sieges against nodes within their own ZOI if they wish. All players can freely attack any other players caravan, regardless of node affiliation. While sometimes it won't make sense for players to do this, there are times when it will make sense.