Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
Was mentioned above but my reasoning for not wanting to join a guild is simply that I don't want to be forced into explicit organised events. I enjoy doing what I want to within the game without being told when I need to log in and what I need to do. Guilds always felt like work away from work. Maybe a more casual guild will be fine for me, I guess time will tell.
You, like Amber Heard, are just making up some crazy bs.
It's a shame her lawyers had to deal with that mess.
Being a non-citizen does not increase crafting/market cost.
Being a citizen may decrease crafting/market cost.
A person who chooses to not be a citizen may not care anything about the economy or how much gold they can hoard.
Again, that's what friends are for.
Non-citizens might be able to craft at friends' Freeholds and be perfectly content with the basic costs...not caring about citizen discounts. And some people are content to just gather materials so their friends can craft - so they already get discounts via bartering their services. This is especially true for hardcore time/casual challenge players.
I dunno what you mean by "less access to quests and xp". You don't have to be a citizen of a Node to get quests from Node NPCs.
I'm not beating around the bush and I am not trying anything...
I have emphatically stated that there are numerous ways to play solo and also be highly social.
I suppose incentives are techincally more strong-arming than no incentives. But, it's actually just incentives rather than strong-arming.
I'm not the one being stubborn and disingenous.
Incentives are not synonymous with strong-arming.
Unless you're the mafia using gaslighting euphemisms.
No. The primary reason to solo is so that you are not obligated to meet group or guild expectations or requirements. So that you have the freedom to play when and where you want to play and to play the build you like, rather than the (META) build a group or guild dictates you must play.
Maybe... maybe not.
That assumes they know how to find a casual guild that suits their playstyle - and/or that joining a guild is even an interest.
I stumbled upon a casual guild during the NWO beta.
The twitch chat of a content creator playing the game created a guild with the only requirement being you were a follower of that twitch channel.
And it was super casual. And we still mostly soloed, duoed or trioed.
A few of us would join the content creator when he ran a dungeon for the day.
If it hadn't been for that twitch channel I would not have joined a casual guild and I would not have been looking for one.
Currently, I'm part of two gamer communities:
TheoryForge - with my TheoryForge podcast co-hosts and its followers.
DoP Crew - a gamers who follow and play games with the game devs, Snipehunter and Ombwah. The latter of whom is currently a lead quest designer for Ashes.
Both of those communities form casual guilds in the various games we play together.
But, that's not going to be a very common experience for solo players.
This topic is exactly what it should be.
Especially for a PvX game that supports solo play.
Again, the devs already have some of the systems that the OP asks for.
The design already covers tracking the wins and losses for individuals who participate in PvP battlegrounds (Caravans/Node Sieges) - and even has progression paths for individuals interested in those rankings.
Don't have to join a guild for that.
But...
This topic is not really about solo "content".
And it's not about combat being balanced for individuals, rather than for groups.
The OP asked to have some method of being recognized as relevant even for those who have not joined a guild.
And the prime example was having some form of rank that lets people know that individuals have an excellent track record for winning their Caravan/Siege events even when they don't belong to a guild or even when they are away from their home Node.
And the primary purpose of that suggestion is so that people who may not recognize the individual who is far from their home Node might except the individual into their group - despite the individual not being a member of their guild or a citizen of the local Node.
I know your bias is strong - but you really should try to focus on what's actually being discussed instead of just doubling down on your knee-jerk reactions to a different playstyle from your own.
I think you just cast expeliamus irl
When i see a thread title balancing guilds vrs solo that has a lot of meaning that solo elements can actually hinder fun group play. But kk then lets get back to the original point on how the idea is not well thought out or just flawed to be skew to only be thinking of solo before overarching gameplay
Though I do agree guilds should have a rank reputation as everyone enjoys some form of leaderboards. A leaderboard for mercenaries is not needed. What the leaderboard should be is a per player bases that gives you a rank , number, etc based on what you do.
Leaderboards have nothing to do with solo play as far as a topic is concerned as it is a fun stat tracking useable by everyone. The point to create a weird segregation on a system that tries to reward a player for being solo in a group focused game is counter productive. If there is a rank per player that applies to everyone guild or guildless that is how it should be.
Which also goes back to the original thread name giving people system that pats them on the back for being guildless should be avoided. For the fact that guilds growing in the game helps create more content for people to experience.
I am pretty much vader (from obi wan) for PvE players so not really. He was wise to use you against me....I'll just have to redirect to your post and the title of the thread.
The suggested mechanic is mostly already in the Ashes game design.
And, yes, used by everyone instead of strong-arming people to join a guild.
Which is precisely what the OP wants.
Also not sure if it was mentioned in this thread yet because I just skimmed, but I believe that large guilds will be unable to get as many buffs as small guilds as a sort of soft anti-zerg mechanic. In order to grow a guild past a certain point you will have to forgo stat buffs in favor of max member buffs.
Food for thought if the main concern here is not being able to thrive as a competitive solo player.
Which i think honestly is cool in itself and adds a story and some rp.
That's called risk vs reward.
GW2 and wow are not MMO's. They are single player games with other people in the way. Heard as much about FF14.
You're sticking on the word guild too much. Their guild system is your "mercenaries" system in a way. Smaller combat focused guilds are going to be possible, and get buffed from their guild system for being smaller in number. Larger guilds hiring smaller guilds will be something that happens.
These solo players are cracked legit want to do everything on their own, interact with no one and get all the perks.
Solo player technically can do that and get all the perks you just have a guild with only you and done.
I was actually thinking the same as this after reading the OP. I think your idea is very interesting, @derp ! As @PenguinPaladin said, even if this feature weren't in Ashes of Creation, I believe there will be systems in place that will make this a possible gameplay style of your choice!
I also suspect that being grouped, even temporarily, might be the best defense against PvP.
That suggests that Guilds are a strong advantage. If there a lot of players like the OP, I suspect there will be a lot of small "Pop Up" Guilds that like minded players can join or leave easily.
Is that your cat side talking? o__O
I'd like to second this concern. Simply joining a guild should not make a player better at solo activities. Why should being able see Guild Chat make someone better at swinging a sword? In my opinion, that's an inelegant mechanic that breaks immersion.
IMO, solo play has a place in any fantasy roleplaying world. Make room for the hermit wizard, the knight errant, the wandering bard, and all the other classic fantasy loners. You may want to join the king's feast in a crowded hall, but someone else might prefer sitting with their hood up in the shadowy corner of a less than reputable tavern.
The game is balanced around group play not solo play, this is a mmorpg after all not a single player rpg. The content int he game is around group pvp including smaller groups and massive wars. I don't see this rpg point where you need to be a hermit wizard in a mmorpg, what does that have to do with gameplay? If you want to rp that you can rp that, if you want to do high end content in the game you will need a group.
You are just being triggered by the term solo. In this case, solo does not mean what you think it means.
But, yes, Ashes also supports solo play. So, there is a place for solo play in Ashes - and that still is not the same thing as "single-player" or non-social.
You can be solo and join a guild, i know exactly what it means lmao.
You can do that and be in a guild, if you are trying to make a point of avoiding of being in any guilds or doing group content that is to your own disadvantage. The rp fantasy to be a lone wolf and refuse to use the guild system to get whatever buffs you get from it is your own issue. Its a group oriented game and that is the vision for it. All mmorpgs have solo play in it, that isn't anything new. If you are going to try and say I'm rping so because i rp in this way i should have the guild bonus while being guildless as well I think that is just silly.
The suggestion is to be accepted into groups on the other side of the world even when they don't know you personally. They can recognize your worth by checking your rep.
And there is already a feature for that in the Ashes game design that does most of it.
Maximum is the idea of mercenaries, there are quite a few good players who, for one reason or another, can not be in the guilds, etc., here's a market for mercenaries would be ideal for them.
And these whiners loners, who on every form of MMORPG crying that it is unnecessary to do DPS meters in dungeons, etc., because they get kicked because they only drag the group to the bottom not wanting to develop, do not need the MMORPG community, they do not help the genre evolve, because they do not want to get better themselves!
p.s. English is not my native language, so forgive me if somewhere wrongly expressed the thought
I would somewhat argue the opposite.
Horizontal progression vs more members is not equal?
Having more members is a form of vertical progression.
Now the amount of vertical progression offered to a smaller guild needs to be very precise. Balancing is important. But strictly Horizontal progression would make having smaller guilds somewhat pointless, and all guilds should just go for size.
First. One of the things that came up was the rate at which one player could level a one man guild... that argument is not valid. How quickly one player becomes the best vs a group of players is obviously not "balanced" and it shouldnt be. If you can get ahead on your own, the social structure of an mmo would become meaningless.
The guild system, of potential guild points spent on more members, which is both vertical and horizontal power increase. Vs guild points spent on passive buffs or active skill availability.
It all depends on the depth of the system. Atm people are imagining do i want 20 friends, and vertical buffs vs 200 friends. I believe the guild system will be deeper than that. I see passive buffs durring certain situations. Like 10% more damage and damage resistance while guarding a caravan. I see crafting focused buffs. I see gathering focused buffs. I see very weak overall general combat buffs. And powerful crafting buffs, powerful, specific combat buffs like seiges and caravan interactions. Now i dont know if the system will be so in depth. But it needs to be. More members gives both vertical and horizontal progression. Smaller guilds that want to become usefull towards a purpose, like guarding caravans, or being a nodes crafting service, or being a perfered gathering party. They need some vertical progression to be wanted for these rolls.
Guilds should be able to "vertically scale" towards their perferd role. We just need to balance that a guild cant do everything. Just like with classes. Everyone, solo or not, needs to be able to become something useful, but not be able to do everything. Limiting how much one can do, while still letting them be really good at what they want to do, is the key in making a world where people need one another. And thats what ashes is aming to be.
I dont see why 15 "solo" players couldnt meet up. Talk about how they want to do their own thing, but also need some of the guild passive buffs. And then come together, make a mutual guild thats only there to level the guild up enough for their wanted buffs, and then go their own way. And once these small temp guilds arise, you'll have a whole fleet of random, not at cap solo guilds with the buffs you may want as a solo player, so just try and make some loose friends and join one that fits your play style....
It is possible that larger numbers of players will be needed to level up a guild each time.
Then you have a solo guild lol.
The definition here isnt solo guild, as a single player. Its a guild made up of players who play on their own.