Realm Size vs World / Mega guilds / zerg

maouw

The idea of one guild controlling everything is not sustainable. Eventually, people get drunk on power, there's an internal struggle and it falls to pieces. Especially on the internet where anonymity brings out the darker side of most people.

But I'm with Nagash - hats off to any guild that can set up an empire that conquers Verra - even for a day.

Asgerr

If a large guild forms on your server it's honestly fine. I think they said that at max size a guild can be around 350-500 (i forget exactly) so no chance of something like 2K players out of 10K concurrent ones being in control of all.

However I would predict that a single mega guild would ultimately be ok.

Imagine you achieve Metropolis level of development by being the dominant guild in the area. At some point you'll have run out of dungeons and raids to run within the influence of that node. You would then have to dismantle your own Node in a siege.
To do so, a number of players would have to change their residency to a different Node (preferably not a Vassal Node) and attack themselves.

So really they would keep the game flowing for everyone, and you wouldn't have to stress too much about it and reap the rewards.

There are ways they can hog or gate keep content, but that is the Risk vs Reward philosophy at play. If people group up and are successful - reward them for it. Up to you and others to band together to form a counter.

Chances are there will be internal turmoil at some points and splits will occur, new powers will emerge and it will go down in the annals of that server. Hopefully to be reported on these forums for all to read the delightfully entertaining drama.

Ehrgeiz

Voidwalkers wrote: »

I'd say it's density, not population, that causes problems. Given the currently proposed ideal server population (~50k, with 10k concurrent login) , the sheer size of Verra, and the lack of means for fast travel, I don't see how a mega guild of a few hundred ppl will be able to ruin the gameplay of an entire server, unless somehow you can organize & run a mega guild consisting thousands of ppl.

In your wow example, the root of the problem is the whole server at that point was being tunneled into a single location for content - AQ, which makes it relatively easy for a zerg to dominate. This hopefully will not be the case in Ashes, as high-end PvE contents are unlocked as nodes progress, and eventually there should be enough contents spread through-out Verra, eliminating the need for the whole server to gather in one place.

And if you want to see an example of a game-world so huge that even multiple mega alliance cannot dominate, check out Eve Online. Mega alliances are a thing in Eve (the top 5 alliances have 10k ~ 29k members each, although that number include alts & inactive players). But even the largest alliance (Goons) cannot dominate the server. The most they could do is bullying, but New Eden is so vast that you can always move to somewhere & avoid them. In recent years ppl also periodically band together to start wars against them too.

were are right now at a bloodbath war with PAPI forces. Its said that about 50k goons (and friends) vs 150k PAPI players (of course never at the same time lol).

but anyway you cant compare eve to any mmo since eve is truelly unique and the only game that deserve called "mmo"

akabear

Should a clan wish to make alliances and build strength beyond what the game mechanics allow then really they are doing their members and other players on the server a disservice as by creating a mega clan would diminish what value the gameplay might bring overall..Perhaps win the battle every time, but really just lose war.

Haemosu

Has there been any talk on what the servers will be like? Mega-server? Channels per server? Hopping Servers?

Warth

@Voidwalkers

Haemosu wrote: »

Has there been any talk on what the servers will be like? Mega-server? Channels per server? Hopping Servers?

@Haemosu
no server hopping.
no channels
no mega server, but (by our latest info from 2017) 50k accounts per server with 8-10k playing concurrently.

akabear

I think the numbers need to be that or more as less and it gets way too personal, dry and incestuous.

rikardp98

Noaani wrote: »

Prieston wrote: »

Nagash wrote: »

Prieston wrote: »

My basic concerns:
1. Players being able to trivialize content via zerging
2. there simply not being enough world to go around if server populations are too high

With the lack of fast travel and guilds sizes being linked to bonuses Zerging should have less of an impact on ashes than other games, as for the size of the world I don't think will be a problem with how the nodes work and how content works around them.

I could be wrong, but from what the devs have said, they want to prevent mass zergs. Yet like everything we will have to wait and see.

I hope you're right. guess I've just seen it fail before so I'm worried lol

You cant really look at WoW and then claim to have seen a competent game developer that has put actual effort in to making a good game has failed in a specific aspect of that.

Blizzard have not been competent or interested in making a good game for almost 15 years now.

So, what is it exactly that you have seen fail?

Sorry for going little off topic, but it's funny to see all these wow haters, as soon as someone even mention wow they turn their back and ignore the whole point/concern.

And I do think that the original developers of world of warcraft really cared and believed in their game, and tried to make it as good as possible. Now, I don't think wow is the perfect game, especially the newer expansions. But you also have to realize that WoW classic is still extremely popular, even after 15-16 years. They did something right that's for sure.

I also think that wow is in the past and developers shou strife to make wow 2.0, they should have it as a good example of a decent game made in 2005.

Noaani

rikardp98 wrote: »

And I do think that the original developers of world of warcraft really cared and believed in their game, and tried to make it as good as possible.

So do I, which is why I said Blizzard haven't been interested in making a good game for almost 15 years. If I wated to say the original developers of WoW weren't interested in making a good game, I would have said that Blizzard haven't been interested in making a good game for almost 20 years.

Also, WoW wasn't made in 2005, it was released in 2004, and largely "made" between 2001 - 2003.

rikardp98

Noaani wrote: »

rikardp98 wrote: »

And I do think that the original developers of world of warcraft really cared and believed in their game, and tried to make it as good as possible.

So do I, which is why I said Blizzard haven't been interested in making a good game for almost 15 years. If I wated to say the original developers of WoW weren't interested in making a good game, I would have said that Blizzard haven't been interested in making a good game for almost 20 years.

Also, WoW wasn't made in 2005, it was released in 2004, and largely "made" between 2001 - 2003.

Yeah that's true, I always get them mixed up since it was released in EU 2005.