However, there should be minimal if no difference in what a dedicated player can achieve vs a "basement dweller" that's playing 10+ hours every day.
I've heard this argument a lot in regards to top end content in MMO's, and in some situations it makes sense.
A player that only plays 2 hours a day should still be able to level up to the cap, should still be able to run dungeons (if they can find people to run them with), should be able to participate in crafting, all of that stuff.
Where this argument falls flat is when players are competing directly with each other. If a game were to limit the number of players at the level cap, then that player that could only spend 2 hours a week in the game simply won't make it.
With being a nodes mayor, you are competing against other mayoral hopefuls. Not everyone is going to make it. With how some of these races are being run (especially divine nodes), it absolutely will be the player that spends the most time that comes out on top.
This isn't bad game design, but if a player with little available free time to play attempts to be mayor of a divine node - and actually expects to get somewhere - that is absolutely poor self awareness on their part, and they have no one to blame but themself.
Yea I agree with most of this. I think you are right on the divine nodes, those will be for those who have the most time to do the easy quest content. Or maybe not all quests are created equal and some of the more difficult ones "skilled" players could do to get more credit? Still though, your 10 hours/day person is probably also doing these more difficult quests.
You can have players competing against each other not be 100% time based. A good example of this is PvP ladders. You have to be of a certain level of skill to progress in a ladder. Some people will move up the ladder quickly, some more slowly as they get better over time. Others could play 10x the top end players and never make it to the top.
It's probably harder to do with open world content, but also one of the inherent problems is the ability to balance open world content (whereas instance based combat you can control the size of the groups involved and balance the content based on that).
Military nodes might be where casual players thrive, as to become mayor all you have to do is win in an equalized pvp tournament
Though iirc players can improve their tournament stand-in character through other means to give them an advantage in the tournament. So maybe hardcore will still have an advantage here.
I'd say replace "casual" with "skilled" and this statement is probably right. Of course this would be based on being skilled with a champion, not necessarily your actual character, but I think that's okay (and a good way to balance the issue of classes not being balanced for 1v1).
I wonder if there will be a practice mode for these champions? I think that would be important so that would-be mayors can hone their champion's skills outside of the battle.
However, there should be minimal if no difference in what a dedicated player can achieve vs a "basement dweller" that's playing 10+ hours every day.
This is not ideal in a forced sense.
The way this turns out in practice is time-gated content.
A prime example of this is Genshin Impact, where you only have 160 resin a day to spend doing activities. When you spend all that resin you virtually lose all progression until it regenerates enough for you to get rewards from activities again.
It's frustrating to say the least being unable to play a game because of an arbitrary limitation.
I have not played this game, but it sounds like the core issue is that its 160/day. How long does it take to go through 160 resin? Would it be better if you had 1120/week instead? (or maybe if this is one of those P2W games and even this isn't much time? In which case maybe it should be 5k/week?).
Weekly caps >>>>>>>> daily caps.
The issue isn't the amount, it's the core idea behind it. Regardless if you can use it up in an hour or it takes 100 hours it's still terrible game design.
It's literally just a punishment on the dedicated in order to cater to the casual.
It's the equivalent of someone dragging you down a slope so that you don't get too far ahead of them climbing up it, or even more accurately, tying a rope between both of you so that you can't progress too far ahead, so you're stuck waiting for them to give you some leeway.
I've got mixed feelings on time-gating content. It can sometimes be appropriate because it protects the majority of players from the basement dwellers. Sometimes its not because there isn't enough content to fill the time-gate. I don't feel bad though if the person playing 10 hours/day only has ~10-15 hours of "new/optimally rewarding" content for the week. They can find other things to do with the rest of their time in the game (hey, maybe they can spend some of that time playing another game or... getting a job?).
If you think this is a good argument in game development I don't know what to say. I'm completely astonished someone would actually argue this.
"They can find other things to do than play our game if they don't like that we're stopping them from playing it"
This is absolutely a "it's not fair they spend more time than me so they achieve more, I want handouts or them to be forced to stop to be on par with them too" mindset.
I'm sorry but you don't put Usain Bolt in a wheelchair because he's too fast for his competitors. Your logic is insulting to people who have favourite games to spend their entire day on.
Edit: This is actually getting me tilted because you're saying I'm only allotted 100 points of fun, and once I use up those fun points guess I'm shit out of luck because you don't want me to have more fun than John Doe who complained I spend my time on the game and he doesn't have as much time to spend because of his life choices or unfortunate circumstances.
I'm extremely insulted at this.
The harsh reality is that there's no fair way to balance a casual player who plays for 2-4 hours each day, with a hardcore player who plays 14-16 hours a day. This might work in shallow games, or simple games with no progression, but this game isn't trying to be either one of those. As with most things in life, someone spending 7x the hours doing something more than someone else is going to be much better at that thing.
@Dreoh, I'm not trying to offend or put a cap on your fun. Repeatable content can still be fun and not every piece of content must have constantly equal rewards associated with them.
Consider this: If everything is time based rewarding, then you will alienate the majority of the playerbase to satisfy the minority who can afford the 10 hours/day. Then that minority looks around and wonders why everybody else stops playing the game...
The game needs to be something where the dedicated players can compete against the basement dwellers. The casuals can/should expect to be able to have fun with the game, but they don't need to compete to the same level.
If competition is just time based = win... might as well just make it a participation award because time does not equal skill. My argument is to reward skill before other factors such as time.
The harsh reality is that there's no fair way to balance a casual player who plays for 2-4 hours each day, with a hardcore player who plays 14-16 hours a day. This might work in shallow games, or simple games with no progression, but this game isn't trying to be either one of those. As with most things in life, someone spending 7x the hours doing something more than someone else is going to be much better at that thing.
It's not about expecting casuals can do as much as hard core players. Casuals are not spending the time needed to master the game and so they will not be as good at it.
However, at some point there is diminishing returns on the time spent relative to the ability to develop the skills. You don't need to play 14-16 hours a day to be hardcore in a game. You could play ~4-5 hours a day ~4-5 days a week and be a top notch player in a game from a skill perspective. Those top players should be able to compete against the people spending 10+ hours/day.
The harsh reality is that there's no fair way to balance a casual player who plays for 2-4 hours each day, with a hardcore player who plays 14-16 hours a day. This might work in shallow games, or simple games with no progression, but this game isn't trying to be either one of those. As with most things in life, someone spending 7x the hours doing something more than someone else is going to be much better at that thing.
It's not about expecting casuals can do as much as hard core players. Casuals are not spending the time needed to master the game and so they will not be as good at it.
However, at some point there is diminishing returns on the time spent relative to the ability to develop the skills. You don't need to play 14-16 hours a day to be hardcore in a game. You could play ~4-5 hours a day ~4-5 days a week and be a top notch player in a game from a skill perspective. Those top players should be able to compete against the people spending 10+ hours/day.
People that spend 10+ hours will reach faster higher lvs, access skills, have more gold and gear.
Once you reach them you can compete on skill. Where? In a friendly duel or BGs.
Dominating the world? Not unless you join a guild.
Dont see the point of these casual v hardcore threads. As some1 said alrdy, only shallow games provide for that.
If people could balance casual v hardcore they would do that with real life things, like $$$ and stuffs.
It wont happen.
The harsh reality is that there's no fair way to balance a casual player who plays for 2-4 hours each day, with a hardcore player who plays 14-16 hours a day. This might work in shallow games, or simple games with no progression, but this game isn't trying to be either one of those. As with most things in life, someone spending 7x the hours doing something more than someone else is going to be much better at that thing.
It's not about expecting casuals can do as much as hard core players. Casuals are not spending the time needed to master the game and so they will not be as good at it.
However, at some point there is diminishing returns on the time spent relative to the ability to develop the skills. You don't need to play 14-16 hours a day to be hardcore in a game. You could play ~4-5 hours a day ~4-5 days a week and be a top notch player in a game from a skill perspective. Those top players should be able to compete against the people spending 10+ hours/day.
People that spend 10+ hours will reach faster higher lvs, access skills, have more gold and gear.
Once you reach them you can compete on skill. Where? In a friendly duel or BGs.
Dominating the world? Not unless you join a guild.
Dont see the point of these casual v hardcore threads. As some1 said alrdy, only shallow games provide for that.
If people could balance casual v hardcore they would do that with real life things, like $$$ and stuffs.
It wont happen.
WoW has done this on multiple fronts just within their current expansion (with mixed results in terms of fun). Primarily with limiting how fast you can get gear, not the leveling:
1) You can clear a raid only once per week (good design)
2) There is a weekly cap on the conquest points that goes up each week in the season. You use these points to buy pvp gear. But you have to have rating (aka skill) to level up the gear to higher levels. (excellent design)
3) Leveling doesn't take forever. All of the dedicated players had level cap within the first 1-2 weeks of the expansion (some people like me took off a few days and leveled up 2+ characters from 50-60 in the first week). (excellent design)
4) Weekly chest rewards slows the flow of the highest level gear, but the next level down of gear can be farmed by repeating high level M+ dungeons (which early on in a season takes a decent amount of skill as you are doing it under geared). (good design overall)
5) Weekly/daily quests on progression in the Maw (I'm not as much of a fan on this time gating, but the daily quests didn't reward much so you could skip them most days and still be competitive). (okay design).
6) Weekly gating of the main campaign questline/renown system (I also did not like this much. While it did help ensure a good pace for power growth, it also gated the pace of the story progression which was not good for immersion). (poor design)
7) Weekly cap for Torghast runs that give you the crafting components for legendary items (okay design, somewhat necessary for the legendary system, but limited the rougelike gameplay)
The harsh reality is that there's no fair way to balance a casual player who plays for 2-4 hours each day, with a hardcore player who plays 14-16 hours a day. This might work in shallow games, or simple games with no progression, but this game isn't trying to be either one of those. As with most things in life, someone spending 7x the hours doing something more than someone else is going to be much better at that thing.
It's not about expecting casuals can do as much as hard core players. Casuals are not spending the time needed to master the game and so they will not be as good at it.
However, at some point there is diminishing returns on the time spent relative to the ability to develop the skills. You don't need to play 14-16 hours a day to be hardcore in a game. You could play ~4-5 hours a day ~4-5 days a week and be a top notch player in a game from a skill perspective. Those top players should be able to compete against the people spending 10+ hours/day.
People that spend 10+ hours will reach faster higher lvs, access skills, have more gold and gear.
Once you reach them you can compete on skill. Where? In a friendly duel or BGs.
Dominating the world? Not unless you join a guild.
Dont see the point of these casual v hardcore threads. As some1 said alrdy, only shallow games provide for that.
If people could balance casual v hardcore they would do that with real life things, like $$$ and stuffs.
It wont happen.
WoW has done this on multiple fronts just within their current expansion (with mixed results in terms of fun). Primarily with limiting how fast you can get gear, not the leveling:
1) You can clear a raid only once per week (good design)
2) There is a weekly cap on the conquest points that goes up each week in the season. You use these points to buy pvp gear. But you have to have rating (aka skill) to level up the gear to higher levels. (excellent design)
3) Leveling doesn't take forever. All of the dedicated players had level cap within the first 1-2 weeks of the expansion (some people like me took off a few days and leveled up 2+ characters from 50-60 in the first week). (excellent design)
4) Weekly chest rewards slows the flow of the highest level gear, but the next level down of gear can be farmed by repeating high level M+ dungeons (which early on in a season takes a decent amount of skill as you are doing it under geared). (good design overall)
5) Weekly/daily quests on progression in the Maw (I'm not as much of a fan on this time gating, but the daily quests didn't reward much so you could skip them most days and still be competitive). (okay design).
6) Weekly gating of the main campaign questline/renown system (I also did not like this much. While it did help ensure a good pace for power growth, it also gated the pace of the story progression which was not good for immersion). (poor design)
7) Weekly cap for Torghast runs that give you the crafting components for legendary items (okay design, somewhat necessary for the legendary system, but limited the rougelike gameplay)
A lot of repetitive content. I dont want limitations to how much I can gain. I might wanna play for 20h on a Wednesday and then not log back in for the rest of the week. Freedom.
Also 3). Worst idea ever for mmos. Not gonna happen here.
You can have players competing against each other not be 100% time based. A good example of this is PvP ladders.
You can, and that is why the notary node leadership contest exists.
My point here is that there absolutely are things people with less time can do, and there absolutely are things that they cant do that those with more time can. It is up to each player to pick what they spend their time on.
The idea that everything in the game should cater to those with only a few hours is as absurd as the notion that the game should only cater to those with many hours.
Pick and chose what you spend your time on wisely.
The idea that everything in the game should cater to those with only a few hours is as absurd as the notion that the game should only cater to those with many hours.
Well said!
It's all about balance and with this balance I could see the "dedicated" player able to do most stuff competitively (assuming he/she is a skilled player). Sure there may be only some things the basement dwellers can do (divine node mayor I'm looking at you), but not the majority of the content. Likewise casual players probably shouldn't be hoping to do raids or other competitive content because they don't have the skill or the time to develop that skill. However they should have content they can do as they participate in the growth/defense of their node/guild.
sorry Noaani, lots of people think Blizzard did PvP gearing really well this time around.
The fact you had to end this statement with "this time around" negates any good they may have done.
0
Options
zammwichMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think if a player who only plays 2-4 hours a day can achieve something that required someone else to play 16 hours a day to do then the game is broken, playing an mmo casually and reaching the the very top would make for a boring game that probably doesn't offer a lot of motivation to play. I'm saying this as one of those people who works and cant play all day but used to. I don't ever want a dev to build a game around my limitations xD
I think if a player who only plays 2-4 hours a day can achieve something that required someone else to play 16 hours a day to do then the game is broken, playing an mmo casually and reaching the the very top would make for a boring game that probably doesn't offer a lot of motivation to play. I'm saying this as one of those people who works and cant play all day but used to. I don't ever want a dev to build a game around my limitations xD
or... the player that is playing 16 hours could spend 2-4 hours doing the same thing as the casual player, and then the other 12-14 hours doing other content... There should be multiple paths for progression/content.
I think if a player who only plays 2-4 hours a day can achieve something that required someone else to play 16 hours a day to do then the game is broken, playing an mmo casually and reaching the the very top would make for a boring game that probably doesn't offer a lot of motivation to play. I'm saying this as one of those people who works and cant play all day but used to. I don't ever want a dev to build a game around my limitations xD
or... the player that is playing 16 hours could spend 2-4 hours doing the same thing as the casual player, and then the other 12-14 hours doing other content... There should be multiple paths for progression/content.
But... there should also be paths where they can spend that entire 16 hours - if they wish to do so.
Catering to someone with more time is not the same as catering to someone with less time, several times over - which is what you seem to be suggesting here.
I think if a player who only plays 2-4 hours a day can achieve something that required someone else to play 16 hours a day to do then the game is broken, playing an mmo casually and reaching the the very top would make for a boring game that probably doesn't offer a lot of motivation to play. I'm saying this as one of those people who works and cant play all day but used to. I don't ever want a dev to build a game around my limitations xD
or... the player that is playing 16 hours could spend 2-4 hours doing the same thing as the casual player, and then the other 12-14 hours doing other content... There should be multiple paths for progression/content.
But... there should also be paths where they can spend that entire 16 hours - if they wish to do so.
Catering to someone with more time is not the same as catering to someone with less time, several times over - which is what you seem to be suggesting here.
Yea, it's the difference between creating more content, and restricting content.
sorry Noaani, lots of people think Blizzard did PvP gearing really well this time around.
The fact you had to end this statement with "this time around" negates any good they may have done.
haha...cause no game ever has made a mistake right? No redemption for the devs?!?
What will you do when IS makes its first mistake?
Not even close to the point.
An MMO is defined as much as anything by its persistence. While it's fine to swap out the rewards of a PvP season, the method by which they are attained should remain the same.
Blizzard treat WoW more as an ARPG or BR than an MMORPG.
I think if a player who only plays 2-4 hours a day can achieve something that required someone else to play 16 hours a day to do then the game is broken, playing an mmo casually and reaching the the very top would make for a boring game that probably doesn't offer a lot of motivation to play. I'm saying this as one of those people who works and cant play all day but used to. I don't ever want a dev to build a game around my limitations xD
or... the player that is playing 16 hours could spend 2-4 hours doing the same thing as the casual player, and then the other 12-14 hours doing other content... There should be multiple paths for progression/content.
But... there should also be paths where they can spend that entire 16 hours - if they wish to do so.
Catering to someone with more time is not the same as catering to someone with less time, several times over - which is what you seem to be suggesting here.
Fair enough. Let's use an example. My preferred content is rated pvp. Assuming I win ~70% of my games, I need to play about ~4 hours to hit the cap for conquest points to get the best gear for the week (less skilled players it will take longer because you only get points for wins). However, I can continue to play as much as I like to keep working on increasing my rating (and farm more honor points that I could use for lower level gear that I can use or sell).
Look at that, content for everybody without catering too far one way or the other. The more hardcore player is going to move up faster in the ladder (assuming they are good) and they will have something to work on. The more casual player doesn't get left in the dust and can come back the following week and still be competitive, but it will take them longer to move up the ladder.
Rating is going to matter as well because the higher the rating, the better you can make the top end gear.
Multiple tiers of rewards/reasons for doing content works.
The harsh reality is that there's no fair way to balance a casual player who plays for 2-4 hours each day, with a hardcore player who plays 14-16 hours a day. This might work in shallow games, or simple games with no progression, but this game isn't trying to be either one of those. As with most things in life, someone spending 7x the hours doing something more than someone else is going to be much better at that thing.
It's not about expecting casuals can do as much as hard core players. Casuals are not spending the time needed to master the game and so they will not be as good at it.
However, at some point there is diminishing returns on the time spent relative to the ability to develop the skills. You don't need to play 14-16 hours a day to be hardcore in a game. You could play ~4-5 hours a day ~4-5 days a week and be a top notch player in a game from a skill perspective. Those top players should be able to compete against the people spending 10+ hours/day.
I think the advantage that hardcore players have will largely level off the further it is from release. Usually, there's a huge difference in power level by character level, so until the casual players hit max level, the hardcore players spending 7x the time on the game will completely dominate them. Depending on how much skill, knowledge, and communication the combat requires, it's possible that people spending much less time on the game can outperform no-lifers. I know some people who spend tons of time on something, yet are kind of perma-noobs whom quickly get stuck at a plateau, resulting in them being beaten by people who spend far less time on the game. I personally think this is fine, and I hope that skill weighs more heavily than gear when it comes to combat, but we'll see.
Eventually, casual players can accumulate the experience and skills of a hardcore player. It just takes a longer time. So I wouldn't worry too much about it in the long run.
Rating is going to matter as well because the higher the rating, the better you can make the top end gear.
I assume you know that rated PvP in Ashes wont reward players with any gear.
You keep talking about WoW, and how Ashes could/should be more like it.
What you seem to have missed is that Ashes exists - in part - to be the game that isn't like WoW.
I'm simply providing an example of a system that works (more skills based than time spent based reward system). Not saying it can/should be the same in this game.
Rating is going to matter as well because the higher the rating, the better you can make the top end gear.
I assume you know that rated PvP in Ashes wont reward players with any gear.
You keep talking about WoW, and how Ashes could/should be more like it.
What you seem to have missed is that Ashes exists - in part - to be the game that isn't like WoW.
I'm simply providing an example of a system that works (more skills based than time spent based reward system). Not saying it can/should be the same in this game.
But it isn't skill based.
Someone without the same ability can simply spend longer and get the same.
All it is, like it or not, is a gated system so that people cant progress in gear too fast. It is literally nothing more than weekly grinding, a concept only slightly less abhorrent than daily grinding.
I spent a few years working in a situation where I was flown in for three weeks of work without a day off, and then had two weeks off.
I would often spend 12 hours a day for that two weeks playing my game of choice. This would work out to 168 or so hours of game play every 5 weeks, or a bit over 33 a week.
With the system you described, you could spend 4 hours a week on that system to my average of 33, and I would only ever be able to get 2/5 of the rewards that you are, as I am only playing 2 weeks out of every5.
Artificial gating is bad.
Period.
Sure, sometimes artificial gating may work in your favor, but it always screws someone over.
Developers should just be adding content to the game, assigning suitable rewards to it, and leaving us players to work out what we want to do.
Comments
Yea I agree with most of this. I think you are right on the divine nodes, those will be for those who have the most time to do the easy quest content. Or maybe not all quests are created equal and some of the more difficult ones "skilled" players could do to get more credit? Still though, your 10 hours/day person is probably also doing these more difficult quests.
You can have players competing against each other not be 100% time based. A good example of this is PvP ladders. You have to be of a certain level of skill to progress in a ladder. Some people will move up the ladder quickly, some more slowly as they get better over time. Others could play 10x the top end players and never make it to the top.
It's probably harder to do with open world content, but also one of the inherent problems is the ability to balance open world content (whereas instance based combat you can control the size of the groups involved and balance the content based on that).
I'd say replace "casual" with "skilled" and this statement is probably right. Of course this would be based on being skilled with a champion, not necessarily your actual character, but I think that's okay (and a good way to balance the issue of classes not being balanced for 1v1).
I wonder if there will be a practice mode for these champions? I think that would be important so that would-be mayors can hone their champion's skills outside of the battle.
The issue isn't the amount, it's the core idea behind it. Regardless if you can use it up in an hour or it takes 100 hours it's still terrible game design.
It's literally just a punishment on the dedicated in order to cater to the casual.
It's the equivalent of someone dragging you down a slope so that you don't get too far ahead of them climbing up it, or even more accurately, tying a rope between both of you so that you can't progress too far ahead, so you're stuck waiting for them to give you some leeway.
If you think this is a good argument in game development I don't know what to say. I'm completely astonished someone would actually argue this.
"They can find other things to do than play our game if they don't like that we're stopping them from playing it"
This is absolutely a "it's not fair they spend more time than me so they achieve more, I want handouts or them to be forced to stop to be on par with them too" mindset.
I'm sorry but you don't put Usain Bolt in a wheelchair because he's too fast for his competitors. Your logic is insulting to people who have favourite games to spend their entire day on.
Edit: This is actually getting me tilted because you're saying I'm only allotted 100 points of fun, and once I use up those fun points guess I'm shit out of luck because you don't want me to have more fun than John Doe who complained I spend my time on the game and he doesn't have as much time to spend because of his life choices or unfortunate circumstances.
I'm extremely insulted at this.
Consider this: If everything is time based rewarding, then you will alienate the majority of the playerbase to satisfy the minority who can afford the 10 hours/day. Then that minority looks around and wonders why everybody else stops playing the game...
The game needs to be something where the dedicated players can compete against the basement dwellers. The casuals can/should expect to be able to have fun with the game, but they don't need to compete to the same level.
If competition is just time based = win... might as well just make it a participation award because time does not equal skill. My argument is to reward skill before other factors such as time.
It's not about expecting casuals can do as much as hard core players. Casuals are not spending the time needed to master the game and so they will not be as good at it.
However, at some point there is diminishing returns on the time spent relative to the ability to develop the skills. You don't need to play 14-16 hours a day to be hardcore in a game. You could play ~4-5 hours a day ~4-5 days a week and be a top notch player in a game from a skill perspective. Those top players should be able to compete against the people spending 10+ hours/day.
People that spend 10+ hours will reach faster higher lvs, access skills, have more gold and gear.
Once you reach them you can compete on skill. Where? In a friendly duel or BGs.
Dominating the world? Not unless you join a guild.
Dont see the point of these casual v hardcore threads. As some1 said alrdy, only shallow games provide for that.
If people could balance casual v hardcore they would do that with real life things, like $$$ and stuffs.
It wont happen.
WoW has done this on multiple fronts just within their current expansion (with mixed results in terms of fun). Primarily with limiting how fast you can get gear, not the leveling:
1) You can clear a raid only once per week (good design)
2) There is a weekly cap on the conquest points that goes up each week in the season. You use these points to buy pvp gear. But you have to have rating (aka skill) to level up the gear to higher levels. (excellent design)
3) Leveling doesn't take forever. All of the dedicated players had level cap within the first 1-2 weeks of the expansion (some people like me took off a few days and leveled up 2+ characters from 50-60 in the first week). (excellent design)
4) Weekly chest rewards slows the flow of the highest level gear, but the next level down of gear can be farmed by repeating high level M+ dungeons (which early on in a season takes a decent amount of skill as you are doing it under geared). (good design overall)
5) Weekly/daily quests on progression in the Maw (I'm not as much of a fan on this time gating, but the daily quests didn't reward much so you could skip them most days and still be competitive). (okay design).
6) Weekly gating of the main campaign questline/renown system (I also did not like this much. While it did help ensure a good pace for power growth, it also gated the pace of the story progression which was not good for immersion). (poor design)
7) Weekly cap for Torghast runs that give you the crafting components for legendary items (okay design, somewhat necessary for the legendary system, but limited the rougelike gameplay)
A lot of repetitive content. I dont want limitations to how much I can gain. I might wanna play for 20h on a Wednesday and then not log back in for the rest of the week. Freedom.
Also 3). Worst idea ever for mmos. Not gonna happen here.
You can, and that is why the notary node leadership contest exists.
My point here is that there absolutely are things people with less time can do, and there absolutely are things that they cant do that those with more time can. It is up to each player to pick what they spend their time on.
The idea that everything in the game should cater to those with only a few hours is as absurd as the notion that the game should only cater to those with many hours.
Pick and chose what you spend your time on wisely.
Well said!
It's all about balance and with this balance I could see the "dedicated" player able to do most stuff competitively (assuming he/she is a skilled player). Sure there may be only some things the basement dwellers can do (divine node mayor I'm looking at you), but not the majority of the content. Likewise casual players probably shouldn't be hoping to do raids or other competitive content because they don't have the skill or the time to develop that skill. However they should have content they can do as they participate in the growth/defense of their node/guild.
or... the player that is playing 16 hours could spend 2-4 hours doing the same thing as the casual player, and then the other 12-14 hours doing other content... There should be multiple paths for progression/content.
But... there should also be paths where they can spend that entire 16 hours - if they wish to do so.
Catering to someone with more time is not the same as catering to someone with less time, several times over - which is what you seem to be suggesting here.
haha...cause no game ever has made a mistake right? No redemption for the devs?!?
What will you do when IS makes its first mistake?
Yea, it's the difference between creating more content, and restricting content.
Restricting is obviously less enjoyable.
Not even close to the point.
An MMO is defined as much as anything by its persistence. While it's fine to swap out the rewards of a PvP season, the method by which they are attained should remain the same.
Blizzard treat WoW more as an ARPG or BR than an MMORPG.
Fair enough. Let's use an example. My preferred content is rated pvp. Assuming I win ~70% of my games, I need to play about ~4 hours to hit the cap for conquest points to get the best gear for the week (less skilled players it will take longer because you only get points for wins). However, I can continue to play as much as I like to keep working on increasing my rating (and farm more honor points that I could use for lower level gear that I can use or sell).
Look at that, content for everybody without catering too far one way or the other. The more hardcore player is going to move up faster in the ladder (assuming they are good) and they will have something to work on. The more casual player doesn't get left in the dust and can come back the following week and still be competitive, but it will take them longer to move up the ladder.
Rating is going to matter as well because the higher the rating, the better you can make the top end gear.
Multiple tiers of rewards/reasons for doing content works.
You keep talking about WoW, and how Ashes could/should be more like it.
What you seem to have missed is that Ashes exists - in part - to be the game that isn't like WoW.
I think the advantage that hardcore players have will largely level off the further it is from release. Usually, there's a huge difference in power level by character level, so until the casual players hit max level, the hardcore players spending 7x the time on the game will completely dominate them. Depending on how much skill, knowledge, and communication the combat requires, it's possible that people spending much less time on the game can outperform no-lifers. I know some people who spend tons of time on something, yet are kind of perma-noobs whom quickly get stuck at a plateau, resulting in them being beaten by people who spend far less time on the game. I personally think this is fine, and I hope that skill weighs more heavily than gear when it comes to combat, but we'll see.
Eventually, casual players can accumulate the experience and skills of a hardcore player. It just takes a longer time. So I wouldn't worry too much about it in the long run.
I'm simply providing an example of a system that works (more skills based than time spent based reward system). Not saying it can/should be the same in this game.
But it isn't skill based.
Someone without the same ability can simply spend longer and get the same.
All it is, like it or not, is a gated system so that people cant progress in gear too fast. It is literally nothing more than weekly grinding, a concept only slightly less abhorrent than daily grinding.
I spent a few years working in a situation where I was flown in for three weeks of work without a day off, and then had two weeks off.
I would often spend 12 hours a day for that two weeks playing my game of choice. This would work out to 168 or so hours of game play every 5 weeks, or a bit over 33 a week.
With the system you described, you could spend 4 hours a week on that system to my average of 33, and I would only ever be able to get 2/5 of the rewards that you are, as I am only playing 2 weeks out of every5.
Artificial gating is bad.
Period.
Sure, sometimes artificial gating may work in your favor, but it always screws someone over.
Developers should just be adding content to the game, assigning suitable rewards to it, and leaving us players to work out what we want to do.