Greetings, glorious testers!

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.

To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Would you consider a 1 year wipe cycle?

GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
I think this would be good for the game's longevity as they seem committed to allowing players to take stuff from each other. It allows for a power reset that prevents long established groups from dominating and continuing to grow forever.

Every time a group defeats another group the winner gets bigger. Eventually there will only be a few on one large group/s that control huge chunks of the map and wipe out every seed that is a fresh group due to the massive disparity in power. There isn't always a bigger fish and the longer and longer it goes on the fewer and fewer tadpoles pop up. The massive whale just crushes them as soon as they pop up and without even really knowing they are there at all.

This is very common in my experience in rust where clan members go around at day 5-7 foundation wiping wood starter 2x1s with c4 due to just having a ridiculous amount of resources at their disposal. It's not a planned raid or anything c4 just becomes part of the load out and everything that isn't part of the clan evaporates. Or much rarer but still happens, walling off entire monuments and setting auto turrets all over the beach spawn locations. Effectively making the server unplayable. I can see this happening very easily with just a small group from t6s obliterating t3s as they start to gain traction. Assuming they don't install puppet governments.

It allows for groups that have been fractured to take a break, reset, and come back. Rust, Tarkov, and most minecraft pvp servers operate in a similar way with different time tables based on how long progression takes. It takes about 3 hours to get most of everything in Rust but wipes every week. It takes a few weeks/months to get most of everything in Tarkov and wipes every 6 months or so. Minecraft servers usually wipe based on map size and population and the state of 0,0.

However it's an mmo and continuity is very important. If you already have advancement in systems that don't have power implications like dancing, emotes, music, skins for mounts, pets, gear, etc. Those would be continuous through each wipe so you have something to work towards that you know you will have forever. It also removes the mentality of "I just died and lost all my stuff so i'm just going to quit forever" As you know the random stuff you get you won't have forever anyway, its less painful and less of a quit moment.
«13

Comments

  • ScarbeusScarbeus Member, Alpha Two
    No. The idea that everything I have worked for on my character would just be gone at some point takes away too much enthusiasm to play the game from me.
    r7ldqg4wh0yj.gif
  • arsnnarsnn Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I think the first weeks into a fresh mmo server is the most exciting time.
    I would have loved if aoc would have gone for some kind of cyclical system, especially bc of how the nodes shape the world in the early stages.

    But reseting or fresh servers are usually not healthy for the game and it’s population.
    Maybe they could have gone for a similar route like crowfall did it with their eternal realms, essentially carrying over some progress to a parellel/eternal world and also taking some items with you for the next season.

    I dont think their current ideas would mesh well with any kind of reset mechanism though.

  • I would not mind a yearly wipe.
    But the way the game is now, isn't it supposed to be a similar process? Nodes rise and fall, you have to move to a different node...
    September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
  • CawwCaww Member, Alpha Two
    This is a drastic move for a problem that does not yet exist, let the AoC team do their balance thing first.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Scarbeus wrote: »
    No. The idea that everything I have worked for on my character would just be gone at some point takes away too much enthusiasm to play the game from me.

    Oh no I mention in the post the major things you achieve like skins, dances or whatever like non power systems would all remain. Having a wipe is essentially the same thing as having a new raid come out, everything you worked towards would be made irrelevant and you would only be able to play the new content for power gains. I'm suggesting we replay the early stages instead of replaying the same raid over and over again at endgame.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Caww wrote: »
    This is a drastic move for a problem that does not yet exist, let the AoC team do their balance thing first.

    It exists in a lot of games that have similar systems tho. There a solution for it. Would make sense to implement that solution or come up with an alternative before it becomes an issue that needs to be triaged when the game is live.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Strevi wrote: »
    I would not mind a yearly wipe.
    But the way the game is now, isn't it supposed to be a similar process? Nodes rise and fall, you have to move to a different node...

    Yes and no. When a node falls there will be a certain percentage of people that will quit the game. I don't know if that's .01% or 1% or 10%. Most of the players will just start again but eventually a significant chunk of the players that aren't part of that t6 system will leave. In those other games its completely fine that they leave as in the time span that the game gets stale, the wipe will happen and the players will come back because they can then recompete with those same players on the same footing. Rather than a massively skewed disadvantage. I think Steven said it would take a couple of months to hit level cap so I just said 1 year as a similar ratio as to other games I play that have similar systems but it could be shorter or longer.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    arsnn wrote: »
    I think the first weeks into a fresh mmo server is the most exciting time.
    I would have loved if aoc would have gone for some kind of cyclical system, especially bc of how the nodes shape the world in the early stages.

    But reseting or fresh servers are usually not healthy for the game and it’s population.
    Maybe they could have gone for a similar route like crowfall did it with their eternal realms, essentially carrying over some progress to a parellel/eternal world and also taking some items with you for the next season.

    I dont think their current ideas would mesh well with any kind of reset mechanism though.

    I don't think you should lose everything. I think you should keep things like cosmetics and non power systems, maybe ever some profession progress similar to rust's blueprint system. I'm basing this on the stats for rust and my personal experience playing a lot of this style of game. The game is the most healthy and played at the beginning of the wipe and drops off all the way down till the day of the reset, then shoots back up again when people come back to play it. Quite often doubling the population size from the beginning to end of the wipe. It's been growing steadily for nearly 10 years now so I think the system has proven to be extremely well received in general and incredibly healthy. If a system like this isn't implemented it going to fall into the same problem wow has where your progress is essentially wiped every patch anyway. You're going to end up with 100 raids in 15 years in that 5 people run for mount content because there aren't any relevant rewards for them, and the only thing you can really play is the current patch. This also nerfs the value of the rewards for that raid because you are over geared and can 1 shot the bosses. So it's essentially the same system but with less content. I think this a better option for an mmo than say morhau, csgo, holdfast, etc. Where classes and weapons are essentially all balanced around each other so there is no progression system really.

    https://steamcharts.com/app/252490#3m
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    No, this isn't a survival game.
  • RyozoRyozo Member, Alpha Two
    No
  • NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Big no. It works for Tarkov and The Cycle and those shooter, looter, extract games because the game is built around it. A traditional MMORPG is where you progress your characters over the years, both main and alts for many people. They would have to change the gameplay systems in major ways, and not for the better IMO.
  • Nova_terraNova_terra Member, Alpha Two
    I don't think this would work. It would be a turn off for what I would expect to be a large portion of the player base, and I don't specifically think this game is going to work out where 1 guild/group is holding down an entire server. I just don't think that the ecosystem IS is gunning for would be sustainable if that was the case. And similar to what others have said, I just don't think wipes would work with the infrastructure of this game.
  • Strevi wrote: »
    I would not mind a yearly wipe.
    But the way the game is now, isn't it supposed to be a similar process? Nodes rise and fall, you have to move to a different node...

    Yes and no. When a node falls there will be a certain percentage of people that will quit the game. I don't know if that's .01% or 1% or 10%. Most of the players will just start again but eventually a significant chunk of the players that aren't part of that t6 system will leave. In those other games its completely fine that they leave as in the time span that the game gets stale, the wipe will happen and the players will come back because they can then recompete with those same players on the same footing. Rather than a massively skewed disadvantage. I think Steven said it would take a couple of months to hit level cap so I just said 1 year as a similar ratio as to other games I play that have similar systems but it could be shorter or longer.

    Good point. I thought about this before but not long enough.
    I think is a double effect. People would quit not only because they lose materials but also because when the node falls, the community will spread.
    But unlike in other MMOs, the social bonds can also prevent them to leave. That is what AoC tries to achieve, to create such bonds, beyond what guilds offer and to include into them the non-guild players too.

    It can be that players will migrate together to new nodes but renting apartments will be expensive so they'll go to level 3-4 nodes and seek revenge.
    It might be some chaos after a few sieges. :smile:

    I looked some time ago on the old node simulation and the first sieges happened quite some time after the start. Could be that a server reset each year would prevent node wars. For a 1 year reset cycle, leveling must be increased. Then again, players who like fast cycles, the game has the castles: they level them up in one month and prepare for siege.

    Hard to say how is better.
    For me is important to have sieges and loss associated with them in order to make the community in a node cooperate. If they cannot, then they fall. If that is indeed the reason, then maybe the game failed to create those social bonds.
    September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I would be okay with 'standing up a new server once per year'.

    Maybe repurpose some of those at-launch servers that will DEFINITELY not be as necessary two months in.

    This isn't at all related to 'resetting progress for anyone on their current server'.

    I don't think that the sort of 'power' that Ashes is likely to reward, would be disrupted or affected much by a server reset. It would 'annoy' a properly established group for a bit, but it would also probably push them to play more, or even 'ally with enemies to get back to their previous positions so they could resume their rivalries'.

    The Politics Is Too Strong.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • Nova_terraNova_terra Member, Alpha Two
    Azherae wrote: »
    I would be okay with 'standing up a new server once per year'.

    Maybe repurpose some of those at-launch servers that will DEFINITELY not be as necessary two months in.

    This isn't at all related to 'resetting progress for anyone on their current server'.

    I don't think that the sort of 'power' that Ashes is likely to reward, would be disrupted or affected much by a server reset. It would 'annoy' a properly established group for a bit, but it would also probably push them to play more, or even 'ally with enemies to get back to their previous positions so they could resume their rivalries'.

    The Politics Is Too Strong.

    It's also a case that the ones "in power" got there through 17+ hours a day, or having the bonds you mentioned so what will happen is they will just "do it again". Wipes doesn't fix that but the idea of "Fresh Start" servers every so often would be an interesting idea.
  • tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Hard NO.

    I love character progression and making my toons into something. Wipes like this would ruin things for me.

    Also, the winners should not be punished for winning.

    But you, OP, are totally free to delete and recreate your character every year.
  • HartassenHartassen Member, Alpha Two
    No.

    Wipes are not necessary in a game where social drama will create and destroy alliances and change power structures.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    I could maaaybe see some type of yearly cataclysm just obliterating the lands, destroying all the nodes and leaving the players homeless but with all their gear and blueprints intact.

    The new gear (cataclysms would have to come with expansions and new stuff) and new mobs would be stronger than the previous stuff, but the last t5 would be the new t2, so that the newest players would still be a bit behind, while the OGs would just need to keep farming stuff to progress.

    Though even this kind of setup would only work if the power scaling of gear is quite tight, so that someone in t2 gear could beat someone in t4, especially if their class had the upper hand through the RPS balancing.

    But I'm definitely against taking away all the power from the players every year. Veteran players should stay that way and be known for what they've done in the past.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    I could maaaybe see some type of yearly cataclysm just obliterating the lands, destroying all the nodes and leaving the players homeless but with all their gear and blueprints intact.

    The new gear (cataclysms would have to come with expansions and new stuff) and new mobs would be stronger than the previous stuff, but the last t5 would be the new t2, so that the newest players would still be a bit behind, while the OGs would just need to keep farming stuff to progress.

    Though even this kind of setup would only work if the power scaling of gear is quite tight, so that someone in t2 gear could beat someone in t4, especially if their class had the upper hand through the RPS balancing.

    But I'm definitely against taking away all the power from the players every year. Veteran players should stay that way and be known for what they've done in the past.
    Strevi wrote: »
    Strevi wrote: »
    I would not mind a yearly wipe.
    But the way the game is now, isn't it supposed to be a similar process? Nodes rise and fall, you have to move to a different node...

    Yes and no. When a node falls there will be a certain percentage of people that will quit the game. I don't know if that's .01% or 1% or 10%. Most of the players will just start again but eventually a significant chunk of the players that aren't part of that t6 system will leave. In those other games its completely fine that they leave as in the time span that the game gets stale, the wipe will happen and the players will come back because they can then recompete with those same players on the same footing. Rather than a massively skewed disadvantage. I think Steven said it would take a couple of months to hit level cap so I just said 1 year as a similar ratio as to other games I play that have similar systems but it could be shorter or longer.

    Good point. I thought about this before but not long enough.
    I think is a double effect. People would quit not only because they lose materials but also because when the node falls, the community will spread.
    But unlike in other MMOs, the social bonds can also prevent them to leave. That is what AoC tries to achieve, to create such bonds, beyond what guilds offer and to include into them the non-guild players too.

    It can be that players will migrate together to new nodes but renting apartments will be expensive so they'll go to level 3-4 nodes and seek revenge.
    It might be some chaos after a few sieges. :smile:

    I looked some time ago on the old node simulation and the first sieges happened quite some time after the start. Could be that a server reset each year would prevent node wars. For a 1 year reset cycle, leveling must be increased. Then again, players who like fast cycles, the game has the castles: they level them up in one month and prepare for siege.

    Hard to say how is better.
    For me is important to have sieges and loss associated with them in order to make the community in a node cooperate. If they cannot, then they fall. If that is indeed the reason, then maybe the game failed to create those social bonds.

    I really hope they make it so sieges happen frequently its honestly the thing I'm looking forwards too the most. I love large scale combat in every game i'v played. It's so epic. I wish I could get into eve lol. My only concern about the limited information we have right now is that too many people will get mad and give up. It can be really punishing to see the work you spend hours and hours trying to achieve get steamrolled especially when you feel like you're at a disadvantage. I can't imagine what it will be like losing hundreds of hours. I hope they come up with ways to bring people back, or someway for people to bounce back if they don't do wipes. Maybe have a coup mechanic to break off of t6/5 nodes if they don't fulfill protection obligations? I'm not too sure.

    In my opinion having a new tier set (raiding not nodes) is kind of the the same thing as a wipe, all the gear you worked towards becomes obsolete and you need to re farm everything. And personally the most fun I ever had in wow, short of wargames, was leveling in classic wow. Id take that every time over end game raid progression. I guess it kind of depends on the game tho. Some games getting an end game set takes longer than the leveling and vice versa. I hope they lean into the node system more than the raiding system and don't have a new gear set that's more powerful than the old raiding sets. I think it's fine to have throw away gear while leveling but if you just keep adding layers of power you end up with a lot of long term problems, and I think those problems might be enhanced by the necessity for pvp for node control. Maybe have gear for different purposes if they go down that path. Adding different kinds of resistances for raiding in a similar way to how Pokemon works, like one raid gives you fire damage and another gives you nature damage and you need gear from one raid to do well in another raid, so it's more of a countering meta for pve rather than a scaling meta that disproportionately affects pvp.

    Ya that's a good point, it would probably have to be faster progression. I hope it's not just t5 and t6 nodes that actively combat each other. Would be nice if t1s could fight other t1s, t2s fight other t2s.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Pretty sure I would hate a wipe cycle.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    In my opinion having a new tier set (raiding not nodes) is kind of the the same thing as a wipe, all the gear you worked towards becomes obsolete and you need to re farm everything.
    Imo that's just bad design. The old gear should become obsolete all of a sudden. It should just be a step below the newest best. While lower tiers of new gear could just be sidesteps of the old gear at those tiers, and it could provide an alternative way to get the gear at that tier. This way more people will be able to farm gear of higher tiers, while the top lvl people will have to refarm their sets completely just to get a few more % of dps to edge out a win in pvp against similar top lvl people.

    But that kind of system requires good class balancing and proper ability design. And the "pokemon-like" elemental systems, that you mentioned, would definitely help design those things.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    I could maaaybe see some type of yearly cataclysm just obliterating the lands, destroying all the nodes and leaving the players homeless but with all their gear and blueprints intact.

    The new gear (cataclysms would have to come with expansions and new stuff) and new mobs would be stronger than the previous stuff, but the last t5 would be the new t2, so that the newest players would still be a bit behind, while the OGs would just need to keep farming stuff to progress.

    Though even this kind of setup would only work if the power scaling of gear is quite tight, so that someone in t2 gear could beat someone in t4, especially if their class had the upper hand through the RPS balancing.

    But I'm definitely against taking away all the power from the players every year. Veteran players should stay that way and be known for what they've done in the past.

    I completely agree if there is no reward for getting high up power wise then people won't do it. That's why I stopped raiding in wow. Why would I do this mythic raid when I could just wait 2 expansions and get every cosmetic set and the mythic mounts solo. Than spend a bunch time gearing properly and learning all the mechanics. Everything can just be out scaled and I get all the rewards anyway.

    I feel like the best option for that is giving players titles for achieving a level of power each wipe that is unique to that wipe. So all the resources that go into making more an more raids could be diverted to adding more content to the progression system as you level instead. It's very little work each wipe for the company to add a couple of mounts and titles than to make entire new raids every xpack, and on top of that you get to play through all of the content they already have in the game so it's not cast into the dustbin every new teir.

    Yeah I prefer rust and tarkov gearing to wow's gearing. It works way better for pvp based games. You still have progression for pve but if you are skilled you can outplay people and beat them. You still have an advantage but you can't just stand in a group of 40 new players and take damage for 30 minutes and passively regen more than what they can do to you while they miss 99% of their attacks.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    edited November 2022
    I feel like the best option for that is giving players titles for achieving a level of power each wipe that is unique to that wipe. So all the resources that go into making more an more raids could be diverted to adding more content to the progression system as you level instead. It's very little work each wipe for the company to add a couple of mounts and titles than to make entire new raids every xpack, and on top of that you get to play through all of the content they already have in the game so it's not cast into the dustbin every new teir.
    I'd probably be in the minority, considering how fucking much people care about cosmetics and mounts, but I would not play a game where I just get a title and some cosmetic for achieving some grand goal.
  • No, never wipe

    Tired of wippy games
    PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
  • Nova_terraNova_terra Member, Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    I feel like the best option for that is giving players titles for achieving a level of power each wipe that is unique to that wipe. So all the resources that go into making more an more raids could be diverted to adding more content to the progression system as you level instead. It's very little work each wipe for the company to add a couple of mounts and titles than to make entire new raids every xpack, and on top of that you get to play through all of the content they already have in the game so it's not cast into the dustbin every new teir.
    I'd probably be in the minority, considering how fucking much people care about cosmetics and mounts, but I would not play the game where I just get a title and some cosmetic for achieving some grand goal.

    This just sounds like a season pass with extra steps. I really dislike the overall idea of a wipe with only a cosmetic consolation prize. I really just believe at the end of the day one of their (Intrepid's) areas of focus needs to be making it so a T6 node or a group of guilds can't "Lock" the server down in terms of stopping all raids/content etc. That shouldn't happen and a server wipe won't really fix that issue.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    I feel like the best option for that is giving players titles for achieving a level of power each wipe that is unique to that wipe. So all the resources that go into making more an more raids could be diverted to adding more content to the progression system as you level instead. It's very little work each wipe for the company to add a couple of mounts and titles than to make entire new raids every xpack, and on top of that you get to play through all of the content they already have in the game so it's not cast into the dustbin every new teir.
    I'd probably be in the minority, considering how fucking much people care about cosmetics and mounts, but I would not play the game where I just get a title and some cosmetic for achieving some grand goal.

    Is getting the gear itself the reward for you then? Personally I like stuff that that is outside of power progression, because it never really becomes outdated, new mounts might look better than old ones, but the resolution isn't actually degraded it just doesn't look as good as a new mount. What is your ideal reward? How do you feel about the gear you get becoming less relevant- completely irrelevant after each expansion?
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Nova_terra wrote: »
    NiKr wrote: »
    I feel like the best option for that is giving players titles for achieving a level of power each wipe that is unique to that wipe. So all the resources that go into making more an more raids could be diverted to adding more content to the progression system as you level instead. It's very little work each wipe for the company to add a couple of mounts and titles than to make entire new raids every xpack, and on top of that you get to play through all of the content they already have in the game so it's not cast into the dustbin every new teir.
    I'd probably be in the minority, considering how fucking much people care about cosmetics and mounts, but I would not play the game where I just get a title and some cosmetic for achieving some grand goal.

    This just sounds like a season pass with extra steps. I really dislike the overall idea of a wipe with only a cosmetic consolation prize. I really just believe at the end of the day one of their (Intrepid's) areas of focus needs to be making it so a T6 node or a group of guilds can't "Lock" the server down in terms of stopping all raids/content etc. That shouldn't happen and a server wipe won't really fix that issue.

    Nah fewer steps, you only pull out your wallet when you renew your sub. Not when you buy the gems to buy the tokens to buy the pass levels. Yeah I hope they add a coup mechanic so lower tier nodes can risk being destroyed to gain a node level.
  • Nova_terraNova_terra Member, Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    I feel like the best option for that is giving players titles for achieving a level of power each wipe that is unique to that wipe. So all the resources that go into making more an more raids could be diverted to adding more content to the progression system as you level instead. It's very little work each wipe for the company to add a couple of mounts and titles than to make entire new raids every xpack, and on top of that you get to play through all of the content they already have in the game so it's not cast into the dustbin every new teir.
    I'd probably be in the minority, considering how fucking much people care about cosmetics and mounts, but I would not play the game where I just get a title and some cosmetic for achieving some grand goal.

    Is getting the gear itself the reward for you then? Personally I like stuff that that is outside of power progression, because it never really becomes outdated, new mounts might look better than old ones, but the resolution isn't actually degraded it just doesn't look as good as a new mount. What is your ideal reward? How do you feel about the gear you get becoming less relevant- completely irrelevant after each expansion?

    I think the problem stems from games that make your "BiS" or good gear turn entirely irrelevant in 1 expansion. Gear progression is always one of the bigger draws to games like this but when progression turns into a hamster wheel like Retail WoW at the moment and not a slow degradation of good gear. Specifically If I am in 100% BiS and step away from the game for 6 months to a year, I should still be in something that is serviceable and not worse than gear that is dropping from random world mobs.
  • GandalfthegrapeGandalfthegrape Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited November 2022
    NiKr wrote: »
    In my opinion having a new tier set (raiding not nodes) is kind of the the same thing as a wipe, all the gear you worked towards becomes obsolete and you need to re farm everything.
    Imo that's just bad design. The old gear shouldn't become obsolete all of a sudden. It should just be a step below the newest best. While lower tiers of new gear could just be sidesteps of the old gear at those tiers, and it could provide an alternative way to get the gear at that tier. This way more people will be able to farm gear of higher tiers, while the top lvl people will have to refarm their sets completely just to get a few more % of dps to edge out a win in pvp against similar top lvl people.

    But that kind of system requires good class balancing and proper ability design. And the "pokemon-like" elemental systems, that you mentioned, would definitely help design those things.

    Im ok with some power gains. I like the difference between the metal face mask in rust and the high quality face mask, or the power difference between a usp and an ak in csgo or the iron sword vs diamond sword in minecraft. You can still do damage if you outplay someone. I just hate the difference between level 1 gear and current raid content gear in wow when it comes to pvp. Like look a this. There isn't a single person who thinks this dk is a better player than everyone here and that's why hes killing 30 people at a time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhyTin-V5g0

    vs watching a god destroy people that are way better geared than him

    https://youtu.be/PioDYngKWTA

    One is way more satisfying
  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I brought something similar up in one of our shows: What if Ashes of Creation had a season structure similar to other mmos?. The idea was generally not supported. I for one would love to see what a season structure would be like where instead of calling them seasons we call them generations and your character is retired but the account retains benefits from the character similar to a roguelike. It was pointed out that some people grow very attached to their characters, which I understand. But I think for the right population it could be a blast.
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
Sign In or Register to comment.