Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Server tags
Irohnic
Member
I'm new to following AoC and still working through all the dev updates, AMA's, etc. so forgive me if this has been addressed before. There was an unofficial poll a while back probing interest in server types such as PvE, PvP, etc., including a casual type that limited the hours you were allowed to play per month. The idea was mostly met with dissent, but i wanted to revisit the casual server idea to hear more opinions. I don't agree with a hard limit on number of hours played, but I've been considering if it would be good to have official or community organized server tags around approximate hours played per week, not as a hard rule, but as a recommendation to get like-scheduled people together. The reason being is not to try to nullify competitve advantages that come with playing more, but rather because it seems like such a big focus of the game is giving the player influence over the world, if someone plays significantly less than the average player on the server, they could lose out on that fundamental aspect of the game. The pace of change in the world should reflect the average players time input so as to not be stale nor too chaotic, so I worry that for the casual player who puts in less time per week, it will feel as if they play in a dynamic world, but one in which they have little influence. Server tags could potentially attenuate this issue by homogenizing server populations around their average playtime and therefore making the rate of change of the world match the playtime of a greater percentage of the server's players. Anyway, I'm not convinced in either way if it's a good idea so I'd love to hear some more opinions.
0
Comments
The only way this would work is if you indeed set a hard time cap for some servers, but let’s be serious... that is probably the worst MMORPG suggestion I’ve ever heard.
Steven has made the comment that in other MMO's, everyone receives a participation trophy and that that is not his intent in Ashes. In Ashes, you will not be coddled. You will have to earn things.
Exclusivity will exist in many ways. If you did not earn something and the time to earn it is past, it is gone. As applied to your idea, if a player does not put in the time to have as much influence over the world then that time was missed.
I also want to note from personal experience that the majority of players prefer to play on servers similar to themselves, but I'll admit my MMO experience is limited almost entirely to WoW from 10-15 years ago and current classic WoW. In WoW you don't generally find hardcore guilds purposely going to low population or RP servers so they can dominate. They stick to the high population, more competitive servers where being on top actually means something. I think exclusivity is a great thing in MMO's and my understanding when he has spoken of this stuff is that it refers to things like node leadership, certain titles/achievements, flying mounts, being the pope or whatever of a religion. Exclusivity makes those things meaningful and I'm all on board for that. The point of server tags would not be to eliminate those sorts of perks or rewards you get from being a more dedicated player, and I don't think they would in any way, because as vmangman pointed out, when server tags are just recommendations there is nothing stopping hardcore players from playing on casual servers. That is fine. However, Steven talks about the aspect of influencing the world around you as being a vital part of the experience of playing AoC, at least that is my understanding, so why would you not want to make that part available to as many people as possible? (that's a legitimate question, not rhetorical) You wouldn't want to make flying mounts available to everyone because that would make them meaningless, so that's an example where exclusivity provides a benefit to the enjoyment of the game. But personally I don't see having a server with lower rate of progression as somehow negatively impacting the meaningfulness of the experience of hardcore players. You're comparing the "feeling" of influencing the world around you to the rewards of having exclusivity, but I would compare it more to graphics or combat flow or another vital part of enjoying the game. Someone else having good graphics does not in any way make my having good graphics mean less, I want everyone to experience the game to the highest quality in that regard. In the same way, letting other people experience what it's like to influence the world around them in no way limits the meaningfulness of me experiencing the same, especially if those people are on a completely different server. The argument for exclusivity is only valid if there is a benefit that the exclusivity brings to the game, otherwise you're just limiting the player base of the game or parts of the game for no reason, which is bad game design. I'm more looking for what you guys think would be negatives or unintended consequences of implementing server tags, not "Steven said no participation trophies, so everyone should have to put in the hours to experience the game." If having casual servers would somehow limit your experience as a hardcore player on a hardcore tagged server (or vice versa), I'd love to hear how/why this is the case, because I'm trying to make up my mind on whether I think it's a good idea, while also not knowing whether I personally will be a hardcore or casual player come launch.
that's an interesting thought and definitely something I hadn't thought of. If server tags were to create uneven distributions of players from a "preferred activity/playstyle" perspective it could have poor effects on the health of the servers' economies and/or available "manpower" in certain areas of the game such as crafting.