Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
PvE Difficulty
CaptnChuck
Member
We know that AoC is going to have 80% open world PvE content and 20% instanced PvE content (mainly lore content).
This brings me to my question. How will they create challenging, Open world, PvE content?
We've seen Archeage try this before, but the content itself changed into PvP content due to the fact that the difficulty stemmed from the PvP aspect of it and not from the PvE content itself.
This is why I'm worried about PvE content in AoC, as I feel like Steven, in his pursuit for social interaction, won't be willing to sacrifice some of it in exchange for creating challenging PvE content.
One of my solutions was to create two different types of PvE content: Open world dungeons/raids for enchanting materials/augments/enchanting risk-reducing materials etc. (like enchanting in L2), and Instanced dungeons/raids for gear.
Another solution that I heard was to add a lot of depth to PvE content, by adding multiple rooms and levels and stuff, so that players don't constantly contest each other.
What do you think? Do you think that this is going to be a problem? If so, how do you propose to solve it?
(P.S. There's also the aspect of zerging down bosses but Steven has already stated that they're working on introducing mechanics to ensure that this won't happen. I don't know how successful these mechanics will be, but I really hope that they nail it, as if they don't, the game will fail.)
EDIT - To those of you saying that this game shouldn't appeal to everyone....Shut up. Steven clearly said that he wanted AoC to appeal to all types of players: PvP, PvE, crafting etc. He wants this to be a PvX game.
This brings me to my question. How will they create challenging, Open world, PvE content?
We've seen Archeage try this before, but the content itself changed into PvP content due to the fact that the difficulty stemmed from the PvP aspect of it and not from the PvE content itself.
This is why I'm worried about PvE content in AoC, as I feel like Steven, in his pursuit for social interaction, won't be willing to sacrifice some of it in exchange for creating challenging PvE content.
One of my solutions was to create two different types of PvE content: Open world dungeons/raids for enchanting materials/augments/enchanting risk-reducing materials etc. (like enchanting in L2), and Instanced dungeons/raids for gear.
Another solution that I heard was to add a lot of depth to PvE content, by adding multiple rooms and levels and stuff, so that players don't constantly contest each other.
What do you think? Do you think that this is going to be a problem? If so, how do you propose to solve it?
(P.S. There's also the aspect of zerging down bosses but Steven has already stated that they're working on introducing mechanics to ensure that this won't happen. I don't know how successful these mechanics will be, but I really hope that they nail it, as if they don't, the game will fail.)
EDIT - To those of you saying that this game shouldn't appeal to everyone....Shut up. Steven clearly said that he wanted AoC to appeal to all types of players: PvP, PvE, crafting etc. He wants this to be a PvX game.
0
Comments
https://youtube.com/watch?v=LCPVmn2VQ7E
This is a great balanced solution to players waiting to camp the open world bosses, massive guilds just straight out blocking access for others and casual players wanting to have progress without worrying about alliance, politics, etc.
This way everyone will at least have a chance at getting the gear and if they want to progress to the next level, well then it is time improve themselves and go get those world boss kills and PvP.
Everyone wants to progress. But if the access to gear itself is contested then very few will. This will lead to people leaving the game.
PvP for "pure"(?) PvEers can be a means to attain that ultimate gear + enchant combination. Not everyone will attempt to do so but many might. But if they have to jump through 100 different hoops just to get a 'chance' at a single world boss kill then, then...
Lastly, many MMO players are people with jobs and families. They cant be available whenever the world boss spawns randomly or spend hours killing a guild camping a contested area rather than doing what they like.
Also, there are more PvE players than PvPers, I think. Correct me if I am wrong.
Most are PvX. The amount of players trying to avoid all PvP (PvE Players) is certainly bigger than the amount of players trying to avoid all PvE (PvP Players). The target group for AoC is neither of those 2 though.
Nobody forces them to either. You don't need those worldboss kills to progress your character at all. All the materials are tradeable, there is a tons of way to make the money you need to get these worldboss materials. Some are more time efficient - some are less, but all of them allow you to progress at whatever pace you are comfortable with. If they can't/don't want to participate in the fight for worldbosses, then they can go to less contested 8 man boss in a dungeon instead.
As much as i like hard instanced/competitive PvE Content, there is a very slim to non-existing chance that it would ever affect the primary gearing process as that would go against 2 maybe 3 (depending on definition) of AoC central design principles.
They already do this. Which is good. The challenge will be to make all these rooms viable in terms of progress. Not equally viable, but viable enough for players seeking to avoid conflict to progress in their own pace.
I did a poll regarding this, most are indeed PvX. But a significant portion of them are also PvE focused players that don't mind PvP.
You can check the results out here:
https://strawpoll.com/djxahvjxa/r
As of right now, the game has solid designs for PvP and Crafting systems. I'm not sure about PvE though, as I don't think that PvE content will be challenging enough if most of them are Open-world. I'd be happy to be proved wrong though.
And to those of you saying that this game doesn't appeal to everyone....Shut up. Steven clearly said that he wanted AoC to appeal to all types of players: PvP, PvE, crafting etc. He wants this to be a PvX game.
I have seen 2 dungeons in the game so far. The forest one, and the dragon dungeon. There was also the huge golden temple dungeon, with multiple levels and stuff.
This solution only works if there are A LOT of rooms. So if Intrepid has the ability to do so for every dungeon/raid, then it should minimize the consequences of having open world content by quite a bit.
4.2% is PvE only
1.8% is PvP only
94.0% is PvX
that supports what i said, ty.
I'm as worried as you about the availability of challenging pve content. Gotta wait and see what happens in Alpha i suppose
Warth, did you even read my reply to you? I was talking about PvE focused players. They make up 33% of the total votes. Also, when did I ever say that you were wrong? Most people are indeed PvX. But that margin is only about 10 or 15% different from PvE focused players. So you cannot not make challenging PvE content just because more people are PvX.
IMO:
The Raid Tier Bosses should:
be just as hard as you'd expect an instanced Mythic WoW/ Savage FFXIV Raid Boss to be. A Level of difficulty where you need a dedicated group of PvErs to kill it.
should have clear and very effective "Fuck you Zergs" mechanics, that inhibit all ways of zerging him down.
have a long run up/narrow passage leading up to the boss, that allow the "support aka PVP Raid" to defend the boss attempt of your PVE Raid from other factions trying to interfere.
This
I agree with this.
Don't agree with this and here's why. When the other guild comes to contest, the PvP raid of your guild will be fighting off both the PvP raid group, AND the PvE raid group. You'll be outnumbered, assuming that you're fighting an even size guild.
Then you bring your allied guild with a raid and let them share the loot with you. You possibly even want a 2x PvE Raid at hand, that doesn't fight the boss at the same time, but provides you with a second attempt in killing the boss.
It's not about the size of guilds. It's about how much people you have online at a time and how quickly you can mobilize them to join the fight for the Worldboss. Make allies, fight together, split the loot.
Obviously that might mean, that you'd only get 50 or 33 of the 100 dragon scales for your guild, but this is whats driving Player Interaction through open world raid bosses.
Neither guild/Alliance being able to take it for 3 days is just as much a good outcome as one of them getting
it.
P.S. that's also where guild buffs missed out due to size, uncapped AoE and the inherent advantage for defenders to hold choke points should come from.
And that leads into another problem. Just how many people will you truly need to do PvE content? Do you need guilds, allied guilds and everyone else and their moms, just to do a single raid without contention?
Another problem that this leads to is that this encourages the formation of alliances over enemies/staying solo. Why would guilds form enemies if forming alliances is just simply better? It will lead to a boring situation where the guilds, that own a castle, are always allied with each other.
Because you have to split the loot with them? What kind of question is that lol. Sure you can put the kill on a rotation with the whole server, but who would be happy with that? I guess PvErs would.
Depends on how contested it is. If its the materials for the BiS Legendary gear in the game (which is supposed to be only wielded by fraction of the player base on a server). Then yes, it will be highly contested, there will be alliances to secure these resources and yes you will need sizable support to claim those for yourselves.
That's also exactly what Intrepid intends for this to be.
You can disagree with that, but that's the kind of game they are trying to build and they are willing to risk trying the PvE only crowd away with it, because as Steven has mentioned in the past, this game won't be for everybody.
And that just further supports my point. Why be a solo/opposing guild and get 0 loot when you can be part of an alliance and gain at least some loot?
And that is absolutely ok. You need content in the game that is only meant for large groups.
But that is not the general playerbase. Most of them participate in small to medium-scale group content. So as long as there is ample of challenging PvE content for these players, I'm completely ok with having a few raids and dungeons that can only be done with a large group. But as of now, it doesn't look like it.
Because: people and guilds who aren't needed to lock down the boss for yourself won't even be able to join that alliance. Why would they want to split the rewards with more people than they need to secure every kill? Additionally, once you have it on lock down, you'll simply cut out the guilds/raids that are non-essential to secure your looting rights.
Pretty sure they intend for this be the case, that's why they have,
I personally believe, that their spawn interval should be random within a time frame but intertwined with each other, that would mean, that the strongest guilds/alliances will have to focus on locking down the most profitable ones, while weaker guilds fight each other for the less profitable ones.
If a strong guild decides to go for 2-3 they will essentially split their strength among them and provide weaker guilds chances to contest the others. If every encounter had a fixed spawn time / a spawn time that isn't related to each other, then the strongest guilds would lock down most of them, which is bad game design.
Regional bosses and world bosses are different from raid/dungeon bosses.
I agree with this. I don't think that it will be enough, but maybe it might be with enough testing.
You are missing the core of the problem.
The main issue is not that there is no PvE content but the quality of it and how it will translate into lategame.
There will be PvE content with open world dungeons and bosses that you can grind but it doesn't look like there is anything that's truly meaningfull or challenging from a purely player skill perspective.
PvP players according to the poll roughly 20%, have sieges and generally the world including world bosses as their endgame.
You can literally shape the face of the world and pillage people.
Also I think it is foolish to assume they will just stand guard on those bosses and waste their time.
Nobody wants to be a guard dog.
PvE players roughly 38% have not so much at all apart from meaningless gear grind to do nothing at all in the end.
World bosses won't be compareable to Mythic or savage bosses because you would never kill them since you cannot get enough wipe time /experience on them.
Their is no real reason to expect that those 38% won't just quit the game in favour of a game that is delivering more meaningful PvE content.
No i'm not.
Nobody wants them to be comparable. This isn't supposed to be a WoW clone. This isn't gonna be a WoW Clone with Instanced Raids you wipe yourself 100s of times until you finally manage to kill it.
That doesn't mean that these bosses can't be just as hard, if not harder. The difficulty just arises from different aspects, including limited amount of tries you can realistically get in. The inability to rely on add-ons telling you what to do, when to do it and how not to be an idiot. Different type of mechanics (less one-shot heavy upon screw ups). A higher margin of error in exchange for that...
and you are right. This will not be a WoW Clone. People that expect WoW type PvE Content probably won't find their primary MMO here. That's completely fine. If they want WoW 2.0, they will probably leave disappointed. This has never been designed to be it, this was never intended to be it, this will never be it.
Instanced raids should ABSOLUTELY NOT offer gear, and if they do it should be fairly insignificant compared to gear that comes from open world anything. I see people in this thread saying "Some people might not want to engage with larger guilds and server politics and alliances". Guess what buddy? THAT'S the game. You are saying you don't want to play a large part of the game. That's part of the reason people play open world PvP player driven MMOs. Instanced raids allow you to skip out on a massive part of the game, the open world and the dangers of navigating through it. If you don't want to concern yourself with alliances, server politics, PvP, and things of that nature, there are plenty of games that offer instanced PvE content already.
The game isn't fair, not everybody will be able to get the best gear and kill the most powerful bosses. Stop demanding more instanced content be added when you don't conclusively know how the PvE content in the game will work. And stop throwing around "All those players will leave the game" Like it's a bad thing. The last thing they need to do is cater to PvErs and kill the game like New World did.
Who are you talking to? Really who?
Nobody asks for a WoW clone, I didn't even mention it.
Because this is not part of the argument.
That's entirely what we are debating in the overarching topic:
The quality of the PvE content.
People dropped that world bosses is not PvE but PvP content since the challeng is archieved by the need to contest it successfully not the encounter itself.
The elephant in the room is how they would make open world content a challenging PvE experience.
The current assumption is that they won't.
There is no connection to any add-ons or yet again wow since that has nothing to do with it to begin with.
It only ever gets mentioned because its PvE content is challenging for the most part.
I haven't said it won't be a WoW clone but it probably won't yea.
Assuming that WoW type PvE content is good: Why would it be a bad thing to take that as inspiration?
For example just add one WoW style boss into a one room instance.
The developement effort for that would be really low and people had at least something that can be made challenging from a pure PvE perspective.
Having like 1 boss that 2% of the playerbase can kill won't impact the rest of the game and would at least be more than nothing.
It was just a possible solution that I came up with. I never said that it was the only one.
Should have added this to my post.
To those of you saying that this game shouldn't appeal to everyone....Shut up. Steven clearly said that he wanted AoC to appeal to all types of players: PvP, PvE, crafting etc. He wants this to be a PvX game.
There you go, I fixed it.
I actually don't agree with this. Either change it for the whole player-base or don't change it at all.
Also.....How is 1 boss going to do anything to solve the problem?
Of course nobody knows but you can predict things based on the things we know.
The idea of early access / alpha / beta is to solve issues before the game is released.
If you wait until release they will take awefully long until they can actually fix a lack of content in that regard since they are busy solving problems that usually come along with for example the launch itself.
A "wait and see" approach doesn't work most of the time as we have seen multiply times before.
If they manage to do challenging content for PvE players I have no issue if there aren't instanced raids.
It mostly just doesn't work out that way.
If bosses are hard the loot will be good.
That's the design philosophy.
Nobody is asking for anything different.
If that is the case half of the PvE content is not PvE but PvP making it laughable if you look for a challenging PvE experience.
Your demand for crap loot on a challenging PvE encounter is contradicting the design philosophy in the same way instanced content would.
But nobody is really demanding instanced content.
The thing demandend is challenging PvE content, if they make challenging content from a PvE perspective it is fine.
People talk about instancing because it seems unlikely they will archieve challenging PvE content in the open world.
This isn't meant to be a 100% solution.
I am just saying you don't need to transform the whole game.
If you have at least something in the game and it is good people will ask for more.
If you have nothing in the game people will leave because the game just lacks the content to begin with.
Based on what? Prior game experiences with open world content? Why don't you see what the dev team comes up with first before throwing around terms like "instance"
Yeah, people would kill it after a week or two of progress. What then? Supply more and more of those? Suddenly it starts impacting the rest of the game.
No decent PvEr would be remotely happy with 1 instanced PvE Boss, that will die soon enough. Suddenly you need a full raid, then another and then another. PvE Content is barely sustainable when you focus most of your development efforts towards it. Its not at all sustainable when you just develop it as a side note.
as @CaptnChuck said, this wouldn't solve anything at all.
Based on my experience and the experience of other people on this forum.
Why do you dislike the term "instance"?
There is nothing wrong with it if you don't go over board.
If we wait and the content sucks it will take some time to create new content.
Good content isn't created on a whim.
So if we are correct and the PvE content won't be too great we probably have to wait a long time before they can fix that problem.
Basically killing the PvE player base maybe 3 months after release.
Steven wants this game to be PvX. NOT PvP. So you need compelling endgame content for all types of playstyles, PvP, PvE, Crafting etc., in order to make AoC a PvX game.