And if the "Dwarven Bardhs drinking company" runs in to troll everyone, just kill them? Be aware that such people exist and have a rogue scout behind you and if he detects a group like that, ambush them and make them think twice before going after you again.
Rolleplaying in rp topic is ok. Rolleplaying in design discussion is toxic, and only going to ruin the game.
Reality work different, than how rp players imagine it. Noone going to just sit and watch for someone that may not even coming, that's not a fun job to do.
Nevertheless, the troll is the one who dictate when and where to fight, not you. Him dying is 100% irrelevant, just as irrelevant whenever he kills someone or not. The main aim here is interrupting/wiping in the fight, and as you can't just pause/resume the fight, he can easily achieve it, and as much time as he/they wants.
There are also extreme misunderstanding in some ppls mind here.
There are no thing "no end game" in a mmo. If a game won't have endgame, it simply dies. Not slowly, but very fast. Don't think that you reinvent the wheel here, there already was games designed without endgame content, it died so fast that if you blink you didn't saw it XD
Ofc you can be hypocrite and spread that there are no endgame content, while there is, but that just lying, it maybe work as a advertisement, but it not change the facts...
Also non instanced high end PvP/PvE content simply doesn't work. You didn't reinvent the wheel here either. Countless games over decades tried it, so far not worked, never.
Ofc you can continue trying... you can be egoist and say that "oh well the last 10 attempts failed horribly, but they are losers and I'm the xxxGOODxxx game developer, I invented the whole pcgaming lol, I can do it"...
Yeah having both is fine, you can have open world bosses/PvP for the casuals to roam around, and it's a good advertisement too, but that's all. By design it never will be competitive, but will be casualfest zerging, where maybe the leaders sure need some skill, but the overwhelming majority of players will be jut a mindless drone there.
Also, if the designers are inexperienced there maybe will be PvP enabled around bosses at the start, but worry not, that option will quickly vanish, that's guaranteed...
Finally someone that has a bit more MMO experience than casual wow/"insert random dead MMO here where they played 1 hour a day for 3 months". Most people here are very bad at understanding game design flaws. They think "Dungeons are so massive multiple groups can take multiple routes" is flawless and dont understand there has to be a balance.
Completly agree with everything you said. People have been blinded in this game already. Ignoring all past failures of other game.
Historically, arenas and man on man/squad on squad combat have been used since the dawn of time to determinate winners of larger outcomes. They are not useless.
And fighting in the arena just because the hell of it is not meaningless. The most popular hobby in the world is just 11v11 players trying to kick a ball in a net, and sports are not meaningless. They inspire other, they give athletes (or in ashes case, adventurers) the possibility to test themselves in a balanced enviroment where outside world RNG hazards don't impact the outcome. It is the only way to really determinate if you are a better fighter than the other player.
And I am really sorry to drag you out from under the rock but even real life wars and battles are under strict regulations and controlled enviroment. There are dedicated locations where generals decide beforehand where to fight (to protect civilians and many other reasons). Also there are rules, you cant shot specific veichles or persons, the point is, even your fantasy COD wars are under a controlled enviroment.
"I was most competitive when I used training wheels in my dads driveway" This is stupid man, nobody holds your hand in an arena. But in the open world you may very well get help from someone or get RNG on your side. You can just stay in a safe zone inviting all your casual noob friends and gang up 14v3 on your so called wow pvpers. That is what I call training wheels, your kind of gameplay.
Also 400v400? Lol. "there is a great deal of tactical movements, timing" I guess you mean from your PC to your Router and tactically positioned faceroll macros? Mate, those battles are a lagfest and faceroll. Show me one video of a 400v400 battle where I can see "tactical gameplay".
First thing first, you should go you tube Dan Carlin and listen to his WW1 history lesson. Then come amend your thoughts on war being the way you assume.
Pertaining to lagfest, yeah 15 years ago when we didnt have decent broadband and cheap i7s, and superpowerfull GPUs that was a real problem. This is 2018 and that excuse is not valid. If it is, then IS has not done a great job with the code. Sorry, I dont have any saved Fraps to link, that's on me. Also, I never said 400 vs 400, I said 400 on a field, but its irrelevant.
I see you didnt like my training wheels metaphor. I stand by it. If you lose 14v3 in a siege, you lost a castle, or won it if you won. The point is there is an impact. This is the story of Vera, and IS has stated multilple times the balance will be in group vs group. Inherrently making 1v1, 3v3, whatever is not a group combination a silly match to begin with. We should fully expect certain classes to get curbstomped by others.
Lastly, sorry Marz, but sports are ultimatly meaningless. I love Football and watching my team and it is fun when they win. But it has no impact on my life, unless I bet on it, but thats just me self impossing a value that didnt originally exist in the product.
@akmaa I think you misunderstand the "no end game" as you put it. Nobody is saying that AoC will have nothing for people to do when they hit level cap, it's just the idea that there are things (e.g. raids or arenas) that can only be done at level cap like for example WoW might have.
Again, this is what I was saying earlier. You can't just insert a single idea from ashes into your previous experiences with other mmos and think you can predict how it will work out when there are other fundamental parts of the game that are not the same.
"no end game" is actually no "end game" where end game is defined as blah blah blah. There will still be content for level cap players, but for example we already know there will be raids where non level capped players can take part in but also the super hard ones that less than 10% of the player base will be able to experience.
I don't quite understand why you keep saying large battles are just going to be "lagfests". For one thing, 40 v 40 is a really low bar to hit in multiplayer games nowadays. Fortnite Battle Royale, running on another version of Unreal Engine 4, can host 50 v 50 with next to no difficulty, even while adding AI zombies and new map layouts.
Depending on how well the game is designed and ported, 400 v 400 is more than possible as well. Eve Online hit 6000 players in one fight back in January without breaking the game, although that did cause a large amount of lag. Planetside 2, a game created in 2012 and is known for having good graphics, is able to handle more than 400 v 400 without all that much issue. There are plenty of videos showing that, as well.
While it is likely that zerging will take place, an organized and coordinated team is almost always superior to a disorganized zerg. We won't quite know enough about sieges to see how viable zerging actually is until we see more of both the class combat system, as well as the siege-specific mechanics.
@Marzzo1337 While it is likely that zerging will take place, an organized and coordinated team is almost always superior to a disorganized zerg. We won't quite know enough about sieges to see how viable zerging actually is until we see more of both the class combat system, as well as the siege-specific mechanics.
Zerging will need to occur without fast travel (hard to congregate). Spawning system also should help make them less effective.
In events like sieges, this won't be a factor because they will have pre-planned to congregate and defenders will be made aware of the time of siege, but I would argue that that's not really a zerg. I am unaware of spawn mechanics in such situations.
So I guess it is not really clear what you mean by "zerging".
So I guess it is not really clear what you mean by "zerging".
Well, I'm assuming @Marzzo1337 was talking about zerging in the standard context where one side attacks using minimal strategy or coordination, overwhelming the other force just through sheer concentration of forces and superior gear/individual skill. Basically just a metaphoric face-smash of two sides where one emerges victorious for whatever reason. The game that I had mentioned earlier, Planetside 2, is rife with this sort of thing.
@Dygz you are correct abou the label "endgame" not existing but that is for media. Obviously there will be a "hardest boss" or final lore boss and this can be regarded as Endgame. This boss will not be in the open world officialy, since it would mean we would kill it a few weeks after level cap by zerging it, and that would suck.
Real competitive players want arenas and true controlled enviroment. This is already verified to be in the final game. Arenas are the pinnacle of skill no matter what casuals think.
Large scale battles will forever be faceroll because no pc or player can tactically fight in a 20+ vs 20+ scenario. The best rotation is all AOE and no rotation. This holds true for every single pvp game in existemce with large scale battles in MMO history.
Ashes won't have a final lore boss - and really not a "hardest boss". We will be constantly jockeying against other players to maintain possession of the castles and metropolises we want - as well as working together to defeat the mobs that wish to oust us of our possessions. Ashes isn't about defeating a "boss".
Ashes has arenas where players can compete against each other. Players can tactically fight in a 20+ v 20+ scenario when objectives are required to win - which is the case in Ashes.
Rotations are faceroll, sure. Not really applicable to Ashes game design, though. Ashes is a different game than what we have scene previously in MMORPG history. Although, rotation also was not really applicable in NWO battlegrounds, either.
If what you want is to pit yourself one v one against another player - vie to be the leader of a Military Metropolis.
On the topic of Ashes' endgame - you gotta appreciate how they built the world so that when new content is introduced, it makes sense that it suddenly appeared out of nowhere instead of us suddenly discovering a new continent or something.
I mean, we enter the world through a portal. Which means there is an entire other world's worth of content on both sides. They've built it so that whatever content they decide to release in the future, it's reasonable that it could happen. Portals, different levels of magic in alternate worlds/dimensions etc... They've covered their bases from the start.
They really only trying to lure in some washed out WoW players by having some instanced content. If you are one of these people, please don't put all your hopes and dreams into this game..... Those will get shattered
You can't just define the purpose of the game based on your own interests, especially a sandbox game where the point of the game for some people may be to run around and explore or become master craftspeople or w.e they choose.
Ashes is a PvX game. When core game play includes node sieges, castle sieges, caravan raids and monster coin events - final lore boss is not a thing. Especially not when new bosses are spawned after new buildings are built as nodes develop and re-develop.
Ashes is a PvX game. When core game play includes node sieges, castle sieges, caravan raids and monster coin events - final lore boss is not a thing. Especially not when new bosses are spawned after new buildings are built as nodes develop and re-develop.
Core game play imo is raids, PvE encounters that need to be unlocked/triggered through the node system. After all, Steven said "We want as many people as possible to experience the main server Narrative" not we want people to forever fight over castles and caravans. Also, gear is obtained through PvE content or crafted requiring materials obtained through PvE content. The opinion I just provided is just as valid as yours. Yes, opinion, because the reality is that it is a PvX game as you mentioned which means the "core gameplay" involves PvE PvP and crafting.
Your description of what you call "core gameplay" is not a description, it is your opinion. Based on which you conclude that there is no final lore boss when we have little to no information on lore. It's essentially like saying the chicken most definitely came before the egg, but I can just as easily tell you the egg came first.
Ashes is a PvX game. When core game play includes node sieges, castle sieges, caravan raids and monster coin events - final lore boss is not a thing. Especially not when new bosses are spawned after new buildings are built as nodes develop and re-develop.
... Your description of what you call "core gameplay" is not a description, it is your opinion. Based on which you conclude that there is no final lore boss when we have little to no information on lore. It's essentially like saying the chicken most definitely came before the egg, but I can just as easily tell you the egg came first.
It has been stated many times on different streams that Ashes doesn't have an "endgame", per say. The conclusion that there will not be a "final lore boss" follows logically based off that.
Will there be a boss that is the strongest/hardest out of all bosses? I mean duh, there has to be. Maybe it's arguable as to which one, but different bosses have different difficulties, and one or more will have the highest difficulty. Will the focus of Ashes be on defeating some big boss at the end of each expansion like WoW? No. That has been stated many times by Intrepid.
If you're looking for challenging raiding content, assuming the planned AI development goes smoothly, I'm certain you will find it. But raiding is just a part of the game - not the goal of it. The closest thing Ashes has to an endgame is building a Metropolis, and that's something that is highly competitive and must be maintained, so I suppose the real endgame is its maintenance and the geopolitics/warfare around it.
I'm sure we'll see some big baddies that tie into the lore at some point, and perhaps even get an expansion structured around eventually fighting one. I'd love to see a fight against a Boss with a City or Metropolis - or perhaps even a server, if the devs feel ambitious enough - at stake. But that's not and at this point, according to Intrepid, never will be the focus of Ashes. Which, for a variety of reasons, I feel is the right call.
@Sikuba Well we already know about the monster coin events which will be monster(s) vs a node (city, metropolis etc). We also know you can fail events and quests which may have negative consequences for the local region or even globally . "Events... can be local, regional or global, and consist of boons or banes. They’re triggered based on a lot of different variables, and some may be one-off Events that occur once, and never again. If an Event is handled successfully, then something good happens to the local, regional, or global area. If it fails, then something bad befalls the local, regional or global area. They’ll relate to the overall Narrative, but don’t fall into its overall structure (for the most part). These are the things that will be written into history, and we imagine that as time grows, each server’s history will diverge more and more" https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Events
And my statement was more to the effect of "it's absurd to say yeah it's a PvX game but the core content is only the PvP components" and less so about the details of is there a final lore boss or not (although you make a much better argument for why it may not be a thing than the comment I was responding to). I'm fairly confident that the game, including its PvE content, will be enjoyable to me. I just wanted to emphasize that the "core content" isn't just about PvP incase someone read it and thought it was true.
Yeah, I get the monster coins and I think those will be fun, but I'm hoping for something maybe a little more... apocalyptic. xd
At least, at some point in time. And I, even as an arena junkie (which is apparently looked down upon by a large - or at least very vocal - portion of the community ;P), definitely agree that PvP isn't the focus of the game, although the Node fighting is built pretty heavily into it. Interaction with the world itself as well as its other denizens will be an equal if not greater aspect of the game. This is especially true considering high-level node sieges have a ~7 week cooldown.
The more I think about it, the more I regret doing so, because it just makes me want to play the game more.
i do not understand this post, there is pvp arena combat which is instanced, and if you want a controlled environment to defeat an enemy than play that, the rest of the pvp seems to be open world and dealt in a way which generally affects the world's denizens. high end pvp will be arena, sieges and caravans, i do not think that they will be exclusively limited to "end game" but they are all content that would be available at the end game for a repeated experience. on the other hand the high end pve will generally be open world.
i do not understand the concern over the last bit of because unless every major settlement on your server is a science metropolis you arent going to have to worry about people interrupting your raids because it will involve having to constantly walk to the location over and over if you just keep killing them. which brings us to the point that in order to do things like raids which require a lot of people, organizing and communicating before hand will be of massive importance.
Actually I do want the random 10 people running in.
If <Toxic Guild #928> has picked on people for months and they are trying to do a new open world raid, and their top competitor <Decent Humans> is contesting them, I want <Carebear Alliance> <Been Trolled by Toxic Guild #928> and <Casual Bunnies> to be able to show up and just make life hell for the Toxic guild.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
Honestly, I'm totally down for both the open world and the small amount of instanced arenas/raids the devs plan to have, but trying to shame people for liking one or another is approaching an aggressive level of stupidity. I get it, you don't like instances, and you are easily offended by the opinions of those who think instances will have all the best goodies. I, too, agree that would suck. Since we already know that that is not the plan the devs have, you can reign in that insecurity.
And to all those who still believe that instances are the pinnacle of skill and competition in MMOs, keep in mind that a ranked arena ladder just makes it easier to look at the mechanical skills of players. Mechanics are important, but it's just one specific skill set.
Gotta love topics with polarizing opinions based solely on preference instead of something that can be easily proven/disproved. It makes for such a productive discussion.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
Open world game with open world PvP where decisions and reputation matter.
But let's toss it all in an instance.
Seems like you want a themepark game with non-meaningful PvP like battlegrounds.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
Open world game with open world PvP where decisions and reputation matter.
But let's toss it all in an instance.
Seems like you want a themepark game with non-meaningful PvP like battlegrounds.
Because clearly this learning curve is a bit to high for you, I’ll debase myself and repeat once more that the devs aren't going to "toss it all" in an instance. There is a very small amount of content that may actually get put into instances. By no means anything close to a majority. This has been stated not only by the devs, but withing this thread many times. As active as you are within this community, one would think you would have picked up on that by now.
Seems like you want to argue with your head up your arse. I'm not going to humor you further.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
Open world game with open world PvP where decisions and reputation matter.
But let's toss it all in an instance.
Seems like you want a themepark game with non-meaningful PvP like battlegrounds.
Because clearly this learning curve is a bit to high for you, I’ll debase myself and repeat once more that the devs aren't going to "toss it all" in an instance. There is a very small amount of content that may actually get put into instances. By no means anything close to a majority. This has been stated not only by the devs, but withing this thread many times. As active as you are within this community, one would think you would have picked up on that by now.
Seems like you want to argue with your head up your arse. I'm not going to humor you further.
Cheers ;D
As you have stated yourself, Jahlon has been around for a while and contrary to your belief, knows all of that already. He was calling you out for wanting more instanced crap, and trying to justify it. Instead of being a hypocrite and lying about what others are saying, maybe try to be a moderately decent person at least @Sikuba ?
Just on a side note, you are the type of person I would hunt down for hours on end until you quit the game. You have three choices before this game comes out, shape up, ship out, or hope I am not in the same server as you.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
Open world game with open world PvP where decisions and reputation matter.
But let's toss it all in an instance.
Seems like you want a themepark game with non-meaningful PvP like battlegrounds.
Because clearly this learning curve is a bit to high for you, I’ll debase myself and repeat once more that the devs aren't going to "toss it all" in an instance. There is a very small amount of content that may actually get put into instances. By no means anything close to a majority. This has been stated not only by the devs, but withing this thread many times. As active as you are within this community, one would think you would have picked up on that by now.
Seems like you want to argue with your head up your arse. I'm not going to humor you further.
Cheers ;D
As you have stated yourself, Jahlon has been around for a while and contrary to your belief, knows all of that already. He was calling you out for wanting more instanced crap, and trying to justify it. Instead of being a hypocrite and lying about what others are saying, maybe try to be a moderately decent person at least @Sikuba ?
Just on a side note, you are the type of person I would hunt down for hours on end until you quit the game. You have three choices before this game comes out, shape up, ship out, or hope I am not in the same server as you.
The thing is, I never said that I wanted more instanced gameplay.
Maybe try reading the conversation before posting, hm? I love the groundless little character judgement at the end, too.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
No, because it's a fact. People want that safe place to hide and not be bothered as they level, as they gear up with raid gear and then once they've emerged as a max level juggernaut they want to now fight people once they've safely gotten everything to make them the strongest. This is a PvX game. Which means that you will have to deal with PvP and PvE at the same time at all times. Part of that raid encounter is also dealing with other players. Part of being in a dungeon and spot for farming is that someone else might want that spot and it may be contested.
All instances do is take away pvp and make it a PvE game. So it no longer stays PvX, it's all about turning pvp off. That's what instances are. I'm fine with some here or there, especially if it's the end result of a long quest which you more than likely had to do while the risk of other players were there. but to say that high end content should be instance is dumb. Instancing is the biggest pussy way out of PvP there is. That's not opinions, that's all fact. You're hiding in a zone specifically created for you or your group or your raid completely exempt from pvp? Yeah. That's not what this game is trying to be.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Because others who don't agree with me are bad and stupid, and they don't play the game right. Now I'm gonna call them names so everyonewill know how much *better* I am than them.
No, because it's a fact. People want that safe place to hide and not be bothered as they level, as they gear up with raid gear and then once they've emerged as a max level juggernaut they want to now fight people once they've safely gotten everything to make them the strongest. This is a PvX game. Which means that you will have to deal with PvP and PvE at the same time at all times. Part of that raid encounter is also dealing with other players. Part of being in a dungeon and spot for farming is that someone else might want that spot and it may be contested.
All instances do is take away pvp and make it a PvE game. So it no longer stays PvX, it's all about turning pvp off. That's what instances are. I'm fine with some here or there, especially if it's the end result of a long quest which you more than likely had to do while the risk of other players were there. but to say that high end content should be instance is dumb. Instancing is the biggest pussy way out of PvP there is. That's not opinions, that's all fact. You're hiding in a zone specifically created for you or your group or your raid completely exempt from pvp? Yeah. That's not what this game is trying to be.
Its a "fact". No. I'm more interested in instance because it OFFERS a different experience. At least if its more than TDM. This whole pussy argument is as dumb. Everyone who wants group pvp is a pussy because they can't 1v1. 1v1 me bruh! I'll rek ur shit m8. Fuck you laggy asshole. Bet you cheated to beat me.
At no point have I ever said that I want a large amount of instanced content. I believe that a few instances are necessary, but beyond that I’m happy with open world. You’re trying to disagree with me by saying the same things I have said throughout the thread.
No one understands what context is anymore. Do a little reading on the thread before posting. It’s not a long thread.
@Sikuba this is why i dont post on a thread without reading the entirety of it first and even then might not post if the thread is past a certain amount pages, because other people probably havent read the entire post and just skipped to the last few comments after reading the first few comments. and being civil is a thing of the last era.
The thing with arenas is that they allow greater skill ceiling.
Arena PvP is great at determining which group of *number of players is better, and that is about it.
As you pointed out in another post, arena PvP can be likened to football (or any other team sport). This is a good analogy, sport is usually played as a hobby, and arena PvP would make a good hobby.
However, no wars have ever been fought where the first thing the two sides do is agree to how many solders they can each use.
Arena PvP is a hobby, open world PvP is a war.
You are essentially arguing that a hobby should be the pinnacle.
The thing with arenas is that they allow greater skill ceiling.
Arena PvP is great at determining which group of *number of players is better, and that is about it.
As you pointed out in another post, arena PvP can be likened to football (or any other team sport). This is a good analogy, sport is usually played as a hobby, and arena PvP would make a good hobby.
However, no wars have ever been fought where the first thing the two sides do is agree to how many solders they can each use.
Arena PvP is a hobby, open world PvP is a war.
You are essentially arguing that a hobby should be the pinnacle.
Open world PvP is a bar brawl. Arena PvP is a boxing match.
Which one is a better display of hand-to-hand skill? This isn't a rhetorical question. Some would argue the boxing match shows two disciplined fighters with years of training, and the winner is a great fighter because he's fighting someone of equal skill and no "tricks" are allowed. Others would argue that boxing is ballet with punching and boxers don't do well in a "real" fight where you don't have rules or a ref pulling you apart.
In my opinion, it really just comes down to opinion.
Comments
Completly agree with everything you said. People have been blinded in this game already. Ignoring all past failures of other game.
Pertaining to lagfest, yeah 15 years ago when we didnt have decent broadband and cheap i7s, and superpowerfull GPUs that was a real problem. This is 2018 and that excuse is not valid. If it is, then IS has not done a great job with the code. Sorry, I dont have any saved Fraps to link, that's on me. Also, I never said 400 vs 400, I said 400 on a field, but its irrelevant.
I see you didnt like my training wheels metaphor. I stand by it. If you lose 14v3 in a siege, you lost a castle, or won it if you won. The point is there is an impact. This is the story of Vera, and IS has stated multilple times the balance will be in group vs group. Inherrently making 1v1, 3v3, whatever is not a group combination a silly match to begin with. We should fully expect certain classes to get curbstomped by others.
Lastly, sorry Marz, but sports are ultimatly meaningless. I love Football and watching my team and it is fun when they win. But it has no impact on my life, unless I bet on it, but thats just me self impossing a value that didnt originally exist in the product.
-CS
I think you misunderstand the "no end game" as you put it. Nobody is saying that AoC will have nothing for people to do when they hit level cap, it's just the idea that there are things (e.g. raids or arenas) that can only be done at level cap like for example WoW might have.
Again, this is what I was saying earlier. You can't just insert a single idea from ashes into your previous experiences with other mmos and think you can predict how it will work out when there are other fundamental parts of the game that are not the same.
"no end game" is actually no "end game" where end game is defined as blah blah blah. There will still be content for level cap players, but for example we already know there will be raids where non level capped players can take part in but also the super hard ones that less than 10% of the player base will be able to experience.
Give the wiki a more thorough read imo.
I don't quite understand why you keep saying large battles are just going to be "lagfests". For one thing, 40 v 40 is a really low bar to hit in multiplayer games nowadays. Fortnite Battle Royale, running on another version of Unreal Engine 4, can host 50 v 50 with next to no difficulty, even while adding AI zombies and new map layouts.
Depending on how well the game is designed and ported, 400 v 400 is more than possible as well. Eve Online hit 6000 players in one fight back in January without breaking the game, although that did cause a large amount of lag. Planetside 2, a game created in 2012 and is known for having good graphics, is able to handle more than 400 v 400 without all that much issue. There are plenty of videos showing that, as well.
While it is likely that zerging will take place, an organized and coordinated team is almost always superior to a disorganized zerg. We won't quite know enough about sieges to see how viable zerging actually is until we see more of both the class combat system, as well as the siege-specific mechanics.
In events like sieges, this won't be a factor because they will have pre-planned to congregate and defenders will be made aware of the time of siege, but I would argue that that's not really a zerg. I am unaware of spawn mechanics in such situations.
So I guess it is not really clear what you mean by "zerging".
We will be constantly jockeying against other players to maintain possession of the castles and metropolises we want - as well as working together to defeat the mobs that wish to oust us of our possessions.
Ashes isn't about defeating a "boss".
Ashes has arenas where players can compete against each other.
Players can tactically fight in a 20+ v 20+ scenario when objectives are required to win - which is the case in Ashes.
Rotations are faceroll, sure. Not really applicable to Ashes game design, though.
Ashes is a different game than what we have scene previously in MMORPG history.
Although, rotation also was not really applicable in NWO battlegrounds, either.
If what you want is to pit yourself one v one against another player - vie to be the leader of a Military Metropolis.
I mean, we enter the world through a portal. Which means there is an entire other world's worth of content on both sides. They've built it so that whatever content they decide to release in the future, it's reasonable that it could happen. Portals, different levels of magic in alternate worlds/dimensions etc... They've covered their bases from the start.
Kudos for that, Intrepid ^_^
I'm not sure what you mean by that... If you are PvE focused then yes, Ashes is about beating some boss or another.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Bosses
You can't just define the purpose of the game based on your own interests, especially a sandbox game where the point of the game for some people may be to run around and explore or become master craftspeople or w.e they choose.
Also, can you provide some source for that?
When core game play includes node sieges, castle sieges, caravan raids and monster coin events - final lore boss is not a thing.
Especially not when new bosses are spawned after new buildings are built as nodes develop and re-develop.
Core game play imo is raids, PvE encounters that need to be unlocked/triggered through the node system. After all, Steven said "We want as many people as possible to experience the main server Narrative" not we want people to forever fight over castles and caravans. Also, gear is obtained through PvE content or crafted requiring materials obtained through PvE content. The opinion I just provided is just as valid as yours. Yes, opinion, because the reality is that it is a PvX game as you mentioned which means the "core gameplay" involves PvE PvP and crafting.
Your description of what you call "core gameplay" is not a description, it is your opinion. Based on which you conclude that there is no final lore boss when we have little to no information on lore. It's essentially like saying the chicken most definitely came before the egg, but I can just as easily tell you the egg came first.
Will there be a boss that is the strongest/hardest out of all bosses? I mean duh, there has to be. Maybe it's arguable as to which one, but different bosses have different difficulties, and one or more will have the highest difficulty. Will the focus of Ashes be on defeating some big boss at the end of each expansion like WoW? No. That has been stated many times by Intrepid.
If you're looking for challenging raiding content, assuming the planned AI development goes smoothly, I'm certain you will find it. But raiding is just a part of the game - not the goal of it. The closest thing Ashes has to an endgame is building a Metropolis, and that's something that is highly competitive and must be maintained, so I suppose the real endgame is its maintenance and the geopolitics/warfare around it.
I'm sure we'll see some big baddies that tie into the lore at some point, and perhaps even get an expansion structured around eventually fighting one. I'd love to see a fight against a Boss with a City or Metropolis - or perhaps even a server, if the devs feel ambitious enough - at stake. But that's not and at this point, according to Intrepid, never will be the focus of Ashes. Which, for a variety of reasons, I feel is the right call.
Well we already know about the monster coin events which will be monster(s) vs a node (city, metropolis etc). We also know you can fail events and quests which may have negative consequences for the local region or even globally
"Events... can be local, regional or global, and consist of boons or banes. They’re triggered based on a lot of different variables, and some may be one-off Events that occur once, and never again. If an Event is handled successfully, then something good happens to the local, regional, or global area. If it fails, then something bad befalls the local, regional or global area. They’ll relate to the overall Narrative, but don’t fall into its overall structure (for the most part). These are the things that will be written into history, and we imagine that as time grows, each server’s history will diverge more and more"
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Events
And my statement was more to the effect of "it's absurd to say yeah it's a PvX game but the core content is only the PvP components" and less so about the details of is there a final lore boss or not (although you make a much better argument for why it may not be a thing than the comment I was responding to). I'm fairly confident that the game, including its PvE content, will be enjoyable to me. I just wanted to emphasize that the "core content" isn't just about PvP incase someone read it and thought it was true.
Yeah, I get the monster coins and I think those will be fun, but I'm hoping for something maybe a little more... apocalyptic. xd
At least, at some point in time. And I, even as an arena junkie (which is apparently looked down upon by a large - or at least very vocal - portion of the community ;P), definitely agree that PvP isn't the focus of the game, although the Node fighting is built pretty heavily into it. Interaction with the world itself as well as its other denizens will be an equal if not greater aspect of the game. This is especially true considering high-level node sieges have a ~7 week cooldown.
The more I think about it, the more I regret doing so, because it just makes me want to play the game more.
i do not understand the concern over the last bit of because unless every major settlement on your server is a science metropolis you arent going to have to worry about people interrupting your raids because it will involve having to constantly walk to the location over and over if you just keep killing them. which brings us to the point that in order to do things like raids which require a lot of people, organizing and communicating before hand will be of massive importance.
If <Toxic Guild #928> has picked on people for months and they are trying to do a new open world raid, and their top competitor <Decent Humans> is contesting them, I want <Carebear Alliance> <Been Trolled by Toxic Guild #928> and <Casual Bunnies> to be able to show up and just make life hell for the Toxic guild.
Instanced PvP and PvE is where pussies go to hide.
Honestly, I'm totally down for both the open world and the small amount of instanced arenas/raids the devs plan to have, but trying to shame people for liking one or another is approaching an aggressive level of stupidity. I get it, you don't like instances, and you are easily offended by the opinions of those who think instances will have all the best goodies. I, too, agree that would suck. Since we already know that that is not the plan the devs have, you can reign in that insecurity.
And to all those who still believe that instances are the pinnacle of skill and competition in MMOs, keep in mind that a ranked arena ladder just makes it easier to look at the mechanical skills of players. Mechanics are important, but it's just one specific skill set.
Gotta love topics with polarizing opinions based solely on preference instead of something that can be easily proven/disproved. It makes for such a productive discussion.
But let's toss it all in an instance.
Seems like you want a themepark game with non-meaningful PvP like battlegrounds.
Seems like you want to argue with your head up your arse. I'm not going to humor you further.
Cheers ;D
Just on a side note, you are the type of person I would hunt down for hours on end until you quit the game. You have three choices before this game comes out, shape up, ship out, or hope I am not in the same server as you.
Maybe try reading the conversation before posting, hm? I love the groundless little character judgement at the end, too.
No, because it's a fact. People want that safe place to hide and not be bothered as they level, as they gear up with raid gear and then once they've emerged as a max level juggernaut they want to now fight people once they've safely gotten everything to make them the strongest. This is a PvX game. Which means that you will have to deal with PvP and PvE at the same time at all times. Part of that raid encounter is also dealing with other players. Part of being in a dungeon and spot for farming is that someone else might want that spot and it may be contested.
All instances do is take away pvp and make it a PvE game. So it no longer stays PvX, it's all about turning pvp off. That's what instances are. I'm fine with some here or there, especially if it's the end result of a long quest which you more than likely had to do while the risk of other players were there. but to say that high end content should be instance is dumb. Instancing is the biggest pussy way out of PvP there is. That's not opinions, that's all fact. You're hiding in a zone specifically created for you or your group or your raid completely exempt from pvp? Yeah. That's not what this game is trying to be.
At no point have I ever said that I want a large amount of instanced content. I believe that a few instances are necessary, but beyond that I’m happy with open world. You’re trying to disagree with me by saying the same things I have said throughout the thread.
No one understands what context is anymore. Do a little reading on the thread before posting. It’s not a long thread.
this is why i dont post on a thread without reading the entirety of it first and even then might not post if the thread is past a certain amount pages, because other people probably havent read the entire post and just skipped to the last few comments after reading the first few comments. and being civil is a thing of the last era.
As you pointed out in another post, arena PvP can be likened to football (or any other team sport). This is a good analogy, sport is usually played as a hobby, and arena PvP would make a good hobby.
However, no wars have ever been fought where the first thing the two sides do is agree to how many solders they can each use.
Arena PvP is a hobby, open world PvP is a war.
You are essentially arguing that a hobby should be the pinnacle.