Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.

Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Destruction of nodes.

2»

Comments

  • Enigmatic SageEnigmatic Sage Member
    rebuild the node or move in to a new one. It's how the game goes. :)
  • PercimesPercimes Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    These people will not go in to the game with this mindset, and most of them will not shift towards having it either. Those players will look at Ashes as they look at all MMO's. The world is persistent, so the value of their character is the sum total of the wealth they have gathered.

    While there needs to be an acceptance of loss in Ashes - without a doubt - this is not and should not be on par with a non-MMO survival game like Rust, a niche PvP only game like Albion, or an MMO with PvP battles so infrequent they each get their own name.

    How would you expect the players with this mindset fair/enjoy a game in which the loses were the same whether through PvE or PvP? Meaning, the penalties from a death were the same no matter what killed you. Same XPs dept, same material carried lost, suffering the same debuffs, etc. What if mobs could also initiate a siege and even destroyed your node instead of being passive in their hole waiting to be killed? It wouldn't be on par with survival games but the threat would always be present. Players are just mobs with weird aggro and more advanced AI in this scenario.

    I don't expect this from AoC, but I would love a game where the mobs were in control of the world at launch, the players coming as explorers/conquerors and the mobs always trying to push back to reclaim their territory. Heck, some factions could instead want to form alliances with the players. Kind of like a slow pace Civilization/MMO hybrid.
    Be bold. Be brave. Roll a Tulnar !
  • DreohDreoh Member, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Percimes wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    These people will not go in to the game with this mindset, and most of them will not shift towards having it either. Those players will look at Ashes as they look at all MMO's. The world is persistent, so the value of their character is the sum total of the wealth they have gathered.

    While there needs to be an acceptance of loss in Ashes - without a doubt - this is not and should not be on par with a non-MMO survival game like Rust, a niche PvP only game like Albion, or an MMO with PvP battles so infrequent they each get their own name.

    How would you expect the players with this mindset fair/enjoy a game in which the loses were the same whether through PvE or PvP? Meaning, the penalties from a death were the same no matter what killed you. Same XPs dept, same material carried lost, suffering the same debuffs, etc. What if mobs could also initiate a siege and even destroyed your node instead of being passive in their hole waiting to be killed? It wouldn't be on par with survival games but the threat would always be present. Players are just mobs with weird aggro and more advanced AI in this scenario.

    I don't expect this from AoC, but I would love a game where the mobs were in control of the world at launch, the players coming as explorers/conquerors and the mobs always trying to push back to reclaim their territory. Heck, some factions could instead want to form alliances with the players. Kind of like a slow pace Civilization/MMO hybrid.

    To add further on this, this argument from @Noaani is a bad faith argument because how can you expect innovation and change in gaming if you just cater to "those people/players".

    They should make the game they want to make, it's on "those players" to realize not every game is WoW.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Dreoh wrote: »
    They should make the game they want to make, it's on "those players" to realize not every game is WoW.

    I don't think you nor Percimes got my point.

    I thought I was being very clear in stating that the games used as an example were simply not appropriate as games to compare to this aspect of Ashes.

    I even gave my exact reasons for each game as to why it was not appropriate to compare to these aspects of Ashes.

    I did not, have never and will never suggest that these aspects of Ashes should be altered.
  • bloodprophetbloodprophet Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Seen the combat tracker threads?
    Most people never listen. They are just waiting on you to quit making noise so they can.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    bloodprophet wrote: »
    Seen the combat tracker threads?

    I haven't.

    Where are they? I have thoughts I'd like to share on the matter.
  • PercimesPercimes Member
    Dreoh wrote: »
    Percimes wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    These people will not go in to the game with this mindset, and most of them will not shift towards having it either. Those players will look at Ashes as they look at all MMO's. The world is persistent, so the value of their character is the sum total of the wealth they have gathered.

    While there needs to be an acceptance of loss in Ashes - without a doubt - this is not and should not be on par with a non-MMO survival game like Rust, a niche PvP only game like Albion, or an MMO with PvP battles so infrequent they each get their own name.

    How would you expect the players with this mindset fair/enjoy a game in which the loses were the same whether through PvE or PvP? Meaning, the penalties from a death were the same no matter what killed you. Same XPs dept, same material carried lost, suffering the same debuffs, etc. What if mobs could also initiate a siege and even destroyed your node instead of being passive in their hole waiting to be killed? It wouldn't be on par with survival games but the threat would always be present. Players are just mobs with weird aggro and more advanced AI in this scenario.

    I don't expect this from AoC, but I would love a game where the mobs were in control of the world at launch, the players coming as explorers/conquerors and the mobs always trying to push back to reclaim their territory. Heck, some factions could instead want to form alliances with the players. Kind of like a slow pace Civilization/MMO hybrid.

    To add further on this, this argument from @Noaani is a bad faith argument because how can you expect innovation and change in gaming if you just cater to "those people/players".

    They should make the game they want to make, it's on "those players" to realize not every game is WoW.

    I don't think it's in bad faith. There is a reason we've seen so many WoW clones over the years, I think many developers have tried to tap into that type of player base because they thought or hoped it would bring success to their games. I don't think Ashes has them as a main target, it's looking like the game will be its own thing.

    @Noaani My questions are more hypothetical in nature, not really applicable to Ashes. How would very PvE-focused players react to a game in which there wasn't really a big difference between the PvE experience and PvP one? Same challenges, same gains, same loses whether you fight against other players or mobs. I don't think we're there yet on technical side of things, but, well, once we are, what then?

    I guess I should ask the same to everyone. What will happen when it's possible to have the same kind of gameplay in PvE and PvP? I'm not suggesting any mobs should be able to pass a Turing test, group with players and not being recognized, only having AI with enough complexity to emulate a semi-organized group of players during fights. Enough complexity for mobs factions to have their own agendas and be on the offensive instead of waiting in their dens and lairs. A game in a virtual world instead of a game world..?
    Be bold. Be brave. Roll a Tulnar !
  • AsgerrAsgerr Member, Alpha Two
    edited April 2021
    Percimes wrote: »
    I don't expect this from AoC, but I would love a game where the mobs were in control of the world at launch, the players coming as explorers/conquerors and the mobs always trying to push back to reclaim their territory. Heck, some factions could instead want to form alliances with the players. Kind of like a slow pace Civilization/MMO hybrid.

    @Percimes
    Well, there will be Monster Coin events - these are monster attacks on a node.
    Players will need to defend their node or risk some of the services and buildings going offline for a period of time, effectively crippling the node's functions. (There will be no node destruction with this).

    Also some players who'll have earned Monster Coins as drops from certain monsters/dungeons/raids, can transform into a monster and join the attack. This allows for Node vs Node content outside of Node Sieges.

    Other events may also cause natural disasters that will affect the node's ability to function at full efficiency.


    Also, at launch, castles will be guarded by monsters and NPCs and players will need to siege and assault them to gain control of them. From then on, it will pass from player to player, unless the castle is abandoned somehow (unsure how that would occur).
    Sig-ult-2.png
Sign In or Register to comment.