How is AoC going to incorporate all level of players in node warfare?

A little background: I'm a avid Eve online player, and many of the systems that AoC is going to have have similar like systems in Eve Online. Eve online however is not a level based system, and that is very good for its pvp playground. Due to Eve online's rock paper scissors systems and role dependancy and specialization options, new players can participate in, and sometimes even perform key roles in pvp. And more importantly no matter what skill level (both player skill and charactar skill point amount) they can all participate in attacking or defending someones home.

How will this be in ashes of creation? If i'm level 20, just got my first tiny house and membership of a node, what will i be able to do to defend my home? Will the level disparity between me and max level attackers make it that i have no chance? will i experiance a dissatisfying time, when i realize that the time and money my character has invested in his or her new home can't realisticly be defended because of level disparity, or will there be options to make yourself usefull?

Here are my suggestions:
Instead of a fixed amount of players, have it set to combined level. Eg 50 lvl 40 players attack, Total pool of levels is 200, the defending team can defend with 40 level 50 players, or 100 level 20 players (Or any combination resulting up to 200 level pool)
Siege weapon efficiency is independant of level or class. This will allow lower level players to partake without having to use immersion breaking scaling effects.
Battleground is split up in brackets of similar levels whenever possible.

When not all levels are equally important in node warfare, the game will become a must be max level to participate, wich will lead to stagnation, and ultimatly player decline and will prevent new player influx

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Ludullu

Solvryn wrote: »

I understand your reasoning it’s just not going to work, you’re not grasping the large picture.

I think what Noaani is talking about is the large picture. The player who spends their whole time on the market is only playing 25%. Noaani is talking about dudes who spend more time playing other parts of the game, pvp included. That's the "stronger" player between someone who's only great at pvp and someone who's good at socializing, pvping, trading and pveing.

Good gear will give an edge, but you'll only capitalize on that edge if you already have a good base of gameplay skill.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

I understand your reasoning it’s just not going to work, you’re not grasping the large picture.

I think what Noaani is talking about is the large picture. The player who spends their whole time on the market is only playing 25%. Noaani is talking about dudes who spend more time playing other parts of the game, pvp included. That's the "stronger" player between someone who's only great at pvp and someone who's good at socializing, pvping, trading and pveing.

Good gear will give an edge, but you'll only capitalize on that edge if you already have a good base of gameplay skill.

Yeah, basically just this.

To add to this a little though, the better a player you are, the more of an edge you will get out of any given piece of gear. As you gear up, the way you play your class should alter ever so slightly (at least if you are playing a game with either complex gear, or complex combat - I've yet to seriously play a game without at least one of these). It takes real knowledge of your class to know what these minor changes are, and what each piece of gear actually means in this regard.

Solvryn wrote: »

They’re going to dip, why? Because the guy who puts no time into their preference can kill them off of gear alone.

I'm curious, how do you know that player has put no time in to their performance?

Don't say "because you always see them in town", because it is fairly normal for someone playing a games economy to have two accounts due to often needing to maintain a character at the auction house. When I am playing a games economy, I will often leave my main doing this, while out killing what ever on an alt account that is somewhat lesser geared (as in, average equipment).

Don't say "because I beat them in normalized PvP", because players like me love to maintain the illusion that it is gear carrying us. Mostly because of how much it pisses off people that simply don't know better. Case in point - this thread. If normalized PvP doesn't matter to us, we are happy to join up, throw a few matches and then watch the bitching and moaning when we demolish those same players in open world PvP.

So yeah, how is it you know they have put no time in to their performance?

NishUK

Noaani wrote: »

However, that is literally putting the best geared player against someone that put no effort at all in to gearing. That shouldnt be an even match - you should expect to at least put some effort in to gear.

This "effort" takes many many many months, if lucky of playing everyday for a good amount of time and this is inaccessible to many and also sad. We've gone past a "game" and moved onto literally a 2nd life that is lucky to have 500 out of the 10k players (that WILL dwindle over time) on a server capable of some form of balanced PvP and where skill actually has some role to play.
Don't you understand how competition works?
I play a pretty high level of Tekken, it takes a person months of discplined training to be in the same picture as me in terms of execution and knowledge but once it's acquired that it's, the player expression and skill takes the forefront and regardless of if you take months of years of break you're still almost indentical to where you left of.
Somehow you thinking the ultimate fantasy is purely about this constant personal gearing progression is your own bag, all you're doing is having your cake and taking away all the other cakes for anyone else to have, there is WAY more you can do with personal progression than making yourself infititevly stronger.

Noaani wrote: »

The original point I replied to was in regard with this point about gear was in relation to the hypothetical player and why they should keep playing the game when others have a two year head start. The basic and fact of diminishing returns is that reason - not just diminishing returns on gear upgrades, but diminishing returns on how many upgrades you can actually expect to get out of a given amount of wealth.

Diminishing returns...now this is a laugh, this demonstrates MASSIVELY how ignorant you are to the combat itself.
Any minor weapon improvement through enchantment usually is major because these old mmo's have massive % buffs, personal and from buffers and then additionally when opponents defenses get ripped apart by debuffers then these things stand out as nothing but ridiculous.
"I'd like to get 250 more physical defense but it will cost me too much, I'm happy with my gear", ye how does that work out...after physical damage dealers have penetrated your armor could be "0" stat and the true damage is bogus but literally if you had only 250 physical defense you'd resist like 10% or more of physical damage, all the time, passively AND with no skill, is gear not carrying? Reeeealllly.

It's just an addictive system to milk the poor whales addicted to the game, nothing more, the old open world mmo's tried deperately to keep the players they had with every single update, they knew they couldn't compete with simple and effective genre's as it would of required a clever rework of their base game + additionally upset the "DESERVED" time spent by players who've played from the start.

I've been on Lineage 2 and Archeage with heroes in the guild, do not pretend like you've lived a hard life on these games, I've actually been through them and happy that I've quit them in a respectable time as they do not respect your time. If you believe gear progression++++ all day everyday for 10% or less of that time for quality PvP+PvE time is a healthy mentality, god help you, you're just addicted to being somebody of worth in life, a "2nd life".

I'm not even playing anymore, this is the first time I've used this sentence to anyone before in my life and hopefully won't have to use it again...
stop
spreading
misinformation xD.

Noaani

NishUK wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

However, that is literally putting the best geared player against someone that put no effort at all in to gearing. That shouldnt be an even match - you should expect to at least put some effort in to gear.

This "effort" takes many many many months, if lucky of playing everyday for a good amount of time and this is inaccessible to many and also sad. We've gone past a "game" and moved onto literally a 2nd life that is lucky to have 500 out of the 10k players (that WILL dwindle over time) on a server capable of some form of balanced PvP and where skill actually has some role to play.
Don't you understand how competition works?
I play a pretty high level of Tekken, it takes a person months of discplined training to be in the same picture as me in terms of execution and knowledge but once it's acquired that it's, the player expression and skill takes the forefront and regardless of if you take months of years of break you're still almost indentical to where you left of.
Somehow you thinking the ultimate fantasy is purely about this constant personal gearing progression is your own bag, all you're doing is having your cake and taking away all the other cakes for anyone else to have, there is WAY more you can do with personal progression than making yourself infititevly stronger.

All of this can be addressed with a simple comment.

MMORPG's are known to take time to play. If you want to excel at an MMORPG, askany gamer and they will tell you it takes time.

Games like Tekken exist for people that do not want to spend that amount of time, as do BR's, FPS games, MOBA's etc. These genres can each be looked at as taking a part of MMORPG's and making that the entire game.

This leaves MMORPG's only selling point as being where you go to play all of those aspects - since individual games will always do each individual aspect better than an MMORPG that is doing all of those aspects.

Diminishing returns...now this is a laugh, this demonstrates MASSIVELY how ignorant you are to the combat itself.
Any minor weapon improvement through enchantment usually is major because these old mmo's have massive % buffs, personal and from buffers and then additionally when opponents defenses get ripped apart by debuffers then these things stand out as nothing but ridiculous.
"I'd like to get 250 more physical defense but it will cost me too much, I'm happy with my gear", ye how does that work out...after physical damage dealers have penetrated your armor could be "0" stat and the true damage is bogus but literally if you had only 250 physical defense you'd resist like 10% or more of physical damage, all the time, passively with no skill.

Yeah, shit MMO's have shit mechanics.

You should know by now, while L2 had a few good points, it wasn't a well designed game. The more you talk about it, the more it's bad design (and lack of serious post launch upkeep) is obvious.

I've been on Lineage 2 and Archeage with heroes in the guild, do not pretend like you've lived a hard life on these games, I've actually been through them and happy that I've quit them in a respectable time as they do not respect your time. If you believe gear progression++++ all day everyday for 10% or less of that time for PvP is a healthy mentality, god help you, you're just addicted to being somebody of worth in life, a "2nd life".

I don't pretend like I had a hard life in Archeage.

Never have.

As I have said many times, I spent over a year in Archeage as the only player in my faction (pirate). This meant me and my alts were all de facto heroes. Not that hero in Archeage was anything to brag about - it was fairly easy to have a hero in your guild, even in a crowded faction on a crowded server - since hero in Archeage was basically just a popularity thing.

What I will say about Archeage, it's pay to win nature necessitated it take longer to get things done if you were not paying for advantage. That isn't a result of teh core design the game was going for - it's time requirement was purely just a means to support it's income.

However, if you had respect for your own time, you could do fairly well in Archeage. With several accounts (most paid for in game, 1 paid for via subscription - faster than just using tax certs), and spending no more than 3 hours a day, maintaining gear that was good enough to be in the top 100 world wide was absolutely possible - but only if you were smart.

Many people would spend much more time than that, and end up with much worse gear. These are people that didn't respect their own time.

Where Archeage didn't respect player time though, was in it's events. If this was your issue with Archeage not respecting player time, I'd agree with you 100%, rather than saying "yes, but" as I essentially did above.

That said, if you prioritized participating in events over gearing up, then yeah, you weren't respecting your own time - or you were, but you are secretly more concerned with appearance than function.

Solvryn

NiKr wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

I understand your reasoning it’s just not going to work, you’re not grasping the large picture.

I think what Noaani is talking about is the large picture. The player who spends their whole time on the market is only playing 25%. Noaani is talking about dudes who spend more time playing other parts of the game, pvp included. That's the "stronger" player between someone who's only great at pvp and someone who's good at socializing, pvping, trading and pveing.

Good gear will give an edge, but you'll only capitalize on that edge if you already have a good base of gameplay skill.

Nikr, the large picture are the consumers of product and the business.

First thing a designer needs to learn is that people aren't going to use their product the way they intended and they're going to want people to continue consuming.

If a company hemorrhages a large enough consumer--base because the designer/engineer/fabricator and company even insist their consumers will use their product as they intend, they're going to be out of business very quickly.

In the case of an MMORPG, players are going to play how they want and if they are not entertained they're leaving.

More specific to the topic, if Intrepid decides to gatekeep certain events, in this case sieges because of level and gear power, they risk hemorrhaging casuals.

Top tier players maximize the effective use of things like gear and racials, so reducing the power of them wont affect them much. They'll still be on top, but it also allows more people to partake in sieges.

And it really doesn't actually matter what the activity is. That's just the actual reality of people.

Noaani

Solvryn wrote: »

Top tier players maximize the effective use of things like gear and racials, so reducing the power of them wont affect them much. They'll still be on top, but it also allows more people to partake in sieges.

I mean, that isn't really the topic here - no one has said they would, and Intrepid have specifically said they won't.

Yes, people at the level cap and with better gear will be more effective at directly fighting other players (as it should be), but that is why siege engines will function as they will function - to allow those not at the level cap and/or not well geared to have a solid, meaningful impact on a siege.

But that still doesn't mean they will be as good as a level capped, well geared player at directly fighting other players.

Ludullu

Solvryn wrote: »

More specific to the topic, if Intrepid decides to gatekeep certain events, in this case sieges because of level and gear power, they risk hemorrhaging casuals.

Top tier players maximize the effective use of things like gear and racials, so reducing the power of them wont affect them much. They'll still be on top, but it also allows more people to partake in sieges.

As I answered immediately in this thread, lowbies will be able to participate and even influence sieges. But their influence will be lower than that of a highbie. Equalizing everything just to appeal to the common denominator would go against what Intrepid are trying to do with the game. Steven knew this back when he decided to make an mmo that takes after L2 and AA.

MMOs are not meant to have perfectly balanced pvp where everyone is equal no matter the time investment. We have several pvp-centered genres for that. All Intrepid need to do is give people the opportunity to get the gear that would allow them to have a chance against those who've gotten even better gear.

Solvryn

Noaani wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

Top tier players maximize the effective use of things like gear and racials, so reducing the power of them wont affect them much. They'll still be on top, but it also allows more people to partake in sieges.

I mean, that isn't really the topic here - no one has said they would, and Intrepid have specifically said they won't.

Yes, people at the level cap and with better gear will be more effective at directly fighting other players (as it should be), but that is why siege engines will function as they will function - to allow those not at the level cap and/or not well geared to have a solid, meaningful impact on a siege.

But that still doesn't mean they will be as good as a level capped, well geared player at directly fighting other players.

The topic was the OP wanting to be partake in sieges, I don't want them reduced to cannon fodder. If they can handle business in the front lines, good.

Ultimately Steven calls the shots, I'll accept it either way.

Noaani

Solvryn wrote: »

The topic was the OP wanting to be partake in sieges.

Yeah, for a few seconds it was, until someone pointed out that what the OP wants is already in the works.

Then it became about how a few of you PvP players can't accept gear having any actual combat effectiveness because you aren't good enough players to get decent gear for yourselves.

Kesthely

Current mentality in most mmo's is to reach max power level and then partake in pvp. This has been so dominant that most developers don't even consider low level (pvp) experiances, and focus only at max level.

Breaking this mindset is difficult because the majority of players are so accustomed to it, they don't even realize it could be different. Realisticly i'm expecting most people to focus on getting to max level, with a few exceptions focussing on crafting. The amount of holistic players that want to do all types of content at every level is going to be few.

This does not mean however that the developers should neglect this minority of players, and they should implement systems for all players regardless of level (and hopefully keep it reasonably balanced at certain intervals)

Solvryn

Noaani wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

The topic was the OP wanting to be partake in sieges.

Yeah, for a few seconds it was, until someone pointed out that what the OP wants is already in the works.

Then it became about how a few of you PvP players can't accept gear having any actual combat effectiveness because you aren't good enough players to get decent gear for yourselves.

I’ve been playing mmorpgs since 99. I’ve acquired and lost more gear in full loot then most ever could hope to grind for.

Gear doesn’t make the gamer good, only top gamers know how to utilize the gear to maximum effect.

Been at the top, no reason to push new blood away so some shitters can stomp people for the Feelsgoodman Participation trophy.

An anagnorisis and peripeteia later and maybe you’ll get “it”.

NishUK

I can't get over the mindset that some people think an online multiplayer game where things are reguarly contested for is better off staying in the dark ages and where strength is decided primarly by how long you play for over the entire course of the game.

It's atrocious, I'd enjoy anyone with this mindset to provide honest context to someone thinking of starting up on the mmorpg genre, making sure to include 100's like myself will be earning a hella lot waking up at the very early hours to get cheeky gold+loot gains away from off peak time and playing most of the day and telling them that every single gold piece and rare loot we earn keeps on increasing our strength...

I'm glad to be away from the genre if it can't evolve, I'd rather it be a PvE only co-op game that Josh Strife Hayes gushes about so I can take the piss out of it easier.

Noaani

Solvryn wrote: »

Gear doesn’t make the gamer good

This is true, and no one has said the opposite.

However, ignoring gear does make a gamer bad. There isnt really any other way to put it.

Noaani

NishUK wrote: »

I can't get over the mindset that some people think an online multiplayer game where things are reguarly contested for is better off staying in the dark ages and where strength is decided primarly by how long you play for over the entire course of the game.

Gear mattering in an MMO does not mean strength is decided primarily by how long you have been playing the game.

As I said specifically to you earlier, this is why developers add in gear resets periodically.

You need to stop reiterating arguments that have already been completely debunked. Sure, L2 didnt have gear resets, but again, L2 had among the worst development of any live MMO I have ever heard about. There are many reasons L2 has almost always had more players on private servers than on official ones.

Solvryn

Noaani wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

Gear doesn’t make the gamer good

This is true, and no one has said the opposite.

However, ignoring gear does make a gamer bad. There isnt really any other way to put it.

Never once have I suggested that the acquisition of gear was supposed to be easy.

Azherae

Solvryn wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

Gear doesn’t make the gamer good

This is true, and no one has said the opposite.

However, ignoring gear does make a gamer bad. There isnt really any other way to put it.

Never once I suggested that the acquisition of gear was supposed to be easy.

I'm trying to keep track of this conversation, and I think I was managing up until this post.

Mind pointing out where this was implied? Doesn't need to be 'said', just implied.

Okeydoke

Of course gear is going to substantially matter in an mmo. That's what drives the whole world. It drives the pvp. If there's no one out in the world doing pve, making money, improving their character, then there's no one in the world to pvp. There's nothing to fight over.

You watch someone like Summit1g play Tarkov, (and I love watching Summit don't get me wrong) but the man can't even be bothered to place items he finds in raid on the flea market(auction house). He'd rather just vendor it all because it's easier. Doesn't take as much brain power. I've watched him piss away millions upon millions doing that. You can make far more money selling an item on the flea market than to a vendor, just to be clear. For the longest time, he couldn't even be bothered to upgrade simple things in his hideout. I mention these things because they're "mmo-y" type things. But so anyway, then he complains he's always broke. It's incredible.

Intelligently playing the economic game in an mmo is a skill. And it matters. Knowledge of the crafting systems matters. Pve skill matters. Inventory/bank management matters. Being efficient in thought, decision and your own personal time in game, matters. All of this leads to a better, stronger, more pvp AND pve proficient character, and rightly so.

So that's the extent to which I agree with Noaani. I definitely agree with Solvryn that the power gaps in Archeage were WAY too big. But that's what this argument comes down to, what should the power gaps be. And secondly, how easy or hard it should be to climb the ladder rungs of that power gap.

In the case of a very pvp heavy game (supposedly) like Ashes though, I think power gaps should be moderate at most. I personally don't want to see insane power gaps. But I do want them to be meaningful.

But no matter what the gear gaps end up being, I expect the economy to fix a lot of potential issues. I expect the market over time to reach a state where enough mats and armor and weapons have been harvested/created that supply/demand does it's thing. The idea being that eventually, kind of "baseline competitive gear sets" are generally affordable for most players, with some effort on their part. (I understand gear deconstruction and needing mats to repair gear will affect this, the principle remains the same though, eventually the market will catch up, prices will moderate.)

There will still be better gear to chase after, but much of the general population will have access to baseline competitive gear due to economies of scale and supply/demand etc.

And then a patch/dlc/expansion will come with a gear reset and we do it all again.

Solvryn

Okeydoke wrote: »

So that's the extent to which I agree with Noaani. I definitely agree with Solvryn that the power gaps in Archeage were WAY too big. But that's what this argument comes down to, what should the power gaps be. And secondly, how easy or hard it should be to climb the ladder rungs of that power gap.

In the case of a very pvp heavy game (supposedly) like Ashes though, I think power gaps should be moderate at most. I personally don't want to see insane power gaps. But I do want them to be meaningful.

That's it, that is it right there.

I was being literal when I was talking about peoples behaviors and design and ultimately Ashes needs subs to continue.

Design a phone? It's a pocket vibrator. That's the way people are, they'll decide the best use of someone elses design and product.

Here's how I see scaling; a copper weapon, a bronze weapon, and an iron weapon are just weapons to the untrained of their time, it would take a significantly skilled warrior to be able to utilize the weapons capability.

I only look at history for reference, look at the Halstatt culture and how it changed into La Tene culture whom would be the face of Celtic peoples. It drove their economic expansion and trade routes, they were some of the best metallurgists and crafters of their time.

I can look at Rome and how they took ideas from Celts and Illyrians in terms of technological advancements. It will not change the supply nor the demand of goods and services, people will always chase something that makes them feel empowered.

But, a range of pea shooter to hellfire missiles cleverly disguised as bow are not a good power scale. People will leave.

So thanks for seeing my point, even though I didn't reveal my whole hand through-out this conversation.

Ludullu

I'd want smth like this

Early power growth is quite fast, but it gets way slower and the difference between each stage of progress lessens the further you progress.

Noaani

Okeydoke wrote: »

I definitely agree with Solvryn that the power gaps in Archeage were WAY too big.

I still disagree with this, but mostly because I know that the bulk of the best geared players in Archeage were damn good players, gear aside.

When they were actually trying on their alts, they were able to take on two or three equally geared, average players.

Again, when you consider that a great player will get more out of better gear than an average player, a great player with great gear will absolutely trample over an average player with average gear - and to be clear, the people here complaining about gear gaps are mostly average players with average gear - and delusions of grandeur.

Child Item