Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here

If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.

Happy with Freeholds acquisition method.

2456712

Comments

  • GarrtokGarrtok Member, Alpha Two
    You still didn't explain or name any argument why bidding is necessary or good.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    NiKr wrote: »
    I don't think Steven ever said that all who want a freehold will be able to have them all at the same time.

    Which would make the comment disingenuous, if it was said with the current implementation in mind. My assumption remains that the design ideal changed.

    Keep in mind, Steven specifically introduced the concept of freehold blueprints in order to lessen the transition between freeholds when you lose one in a siege.

    The concept of having to place items down again was - at the time - considered too much of a burden for players.
  • iccericcer Member
    Liniker wrote: »

    Not just for guild leaders, but for guilds... groups of players, and that is not a "pattern" its not hidden, that is what I always expected of a game inspired by EVE Online, Archeage, Lineage 2.... guild-focused or group-focused content... Steven was a big guild leader, multiple devs working at intrepid came from his guild, this is a public and known fact and this is the game we, that enjoy Social MMOs want to play.

    What doesn't make sense is expecting Steven and intrepid, with all that background, making a solo-player friendly game and allowing for the best endgame housing to be freely available for everyone.

    That's just not Ashes of Creation, that's not an MMORPG, sorry.

    You keep using this phrase "a game inspired by EVE Online, Archeage, Lineage 2".


    Yes teamwork was important for many stuff, but in no game are you expected to constantly play with a group, there always should be time where you're just playing solo. To design a game around being reliant on other players 24/7, is much different from encouraging social aspects by designing the game around group play. I doubt most of those games you mentioned required you to constantly have to play with others to achieve anything. You absolutely could achieve stuff by yourself.

    In your previous post, you said "Not just for guild leaders, but for guilds... groups of players". But everything you say about group effort and stuff, in the end it ends up benefiting leader of that group the most. Be it by funneling stuff to him, so he can buy a freehold, craft and process stuff, etc.
    In your world, everybody should unite and play together... to make you as the leader stronger? Yes, the flying mounts, the freeholds, mayors, all of that stuff will only be available to guild leaders and other "powerful people", who have people below them working for them. Because you can't expect a solo player to achieve that, no, no. You need a slave army that's going to work for the guild leader, so he can feel important and be rich, own the best stuff, be a mayor, etc. While the majority of the playerbase will never get a chance to be in that position or experience that sort of content. I'm sorry, but that's not what playing in a group means.

    All you're saying is, "you can't achieve anything as a solo player, you need a group, but only the leader of that group gets the benefits, while others are left with scraps". Essentially you're using group as a tool to make you more powerful and to make you the mayor, to make you buy a freehold, to make you rich, to make you have the best gear.

    You view Freeholds as if they're guild castles. Freeholds should absolutely be available to solo players. And I'd never expect to own a castle as a solo player, for example.

    I mean it's so obvious why you're arguing in favor of this, seeing that you're a guild leader. You're obviously going to be extremely biased about this, and you won't see an issue, because it will never be an issue to you.


    //


    In my opinion, groups should be there to help each other complete various pieces of content, but to benefit of all group members. So if you do a dungeon with a group, you're all benefiting from it. If you go on a trade run, you're all benefiting from it. If you're killing a world boss, you're all benefiting from it. The group will help each other complete content, and then you could decide what you want to do with the rewards. You could for example sell the materials for gold, or use them to level up crafting and stuff. You could do trade runs, and then use that gold for whatever you want, it's your decision only. Obviously sometimes you'd use the rewards for the benefit of the group, but mostly it's your own decision. I really don't see why having a group should be necessary in order to obtain a freehold.

    You can't expect players to never play solo, or to never pursue their own interests in the game. Not everything needs to be done with a group, and not everything should require a group.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There is ample levelling options for solo players.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There is ample levelling options for solo players.

    In comparison to any other MMO on the market, there really isnt ample.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Depends on your definition. There are quests and hunting grounds. That's banked xp and grinding xp which is all you need.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Neurath wrote: »
    Depends on your definition. There are quests and hunting grounds. That's banked xp and grinding xp which is all you need.

    Yeah, but it isnt ample.

    It is the absolute minimum required to be an MMORPG.

    Honestly, that seems to be what Ashes is becoming. The minimum viable product to be considered an MMORPG, with a few additional systems that only a small number of players will ever use tacked on.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • dnn_dnn_ Member, Alpha Two
    Liniker wrote: »
    dnn_ wrote: »
    A pattern that i'm starting to see with this game is that EVERY high end thing is designed for guild leaders.
    Flying mounts, freeholds, being mayor etc.

    Not just for guild leaders, but for guilds... groups of players, and that is not a "pattern" its not hidden, that is what I always expected of a game inspired by EVE Online, Archeage, Lineage 2.... guild-focused or group-focused content... Steven was a big guild leader, multiple devs working at intrepid came from his guild, this is a public and known fact and this is the game we, that enjoy Social MMOs want to play.

    What doesn't make sense is expecting Steven and intrepid, with all that background, making a solo-player friendly game and allowing for the best endgame housing to be freely available for everyone.

    That's just not Ashes of Creation, that's not an MMORPG, sorry.

    It's funny how you take something that i said, tweaks a little and try to argue against that.

    I don't care if you need a group to do stuff, that's actually why i like playing mmos. What i don't like is when high end shit are only available to guild leaders, but maybe you don't see a problem in that since u are one.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    For what it is worth I think this does help two design issues that have plagued the idea of open world housing.

    1) They get to chose where all of the freeholds go making planning and design the world much easier.

    2) Increasing the size and space between freehold plots will reduce the clash of such a diverse bunch of freehold skins we have access to. I always wonder what it would be like to see Mount Doom right next to Hogwarts and with this I likely will not.
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • akabearakabear Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    @Liniker nice write-up.. Wish there were more starter threads like this.
  • iccericcer Member
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.

    Wow, you can level solo to 50? Damn that's amazing.

    Now can you reach top level of crafting by yourself? Not without your guild funneling you the resources??? Oh well.
    Now can you obtain a freehold all by yourself? Not without your guild funneling you the gold to outbid everyone else??? Oh well.
    Now can you become a mayor for a node by yourself? Actually yes, for 1/4 types of nodes. Others 3 types, not if you're not a guild leader... Oh well.
    Now can you obtain a tier 3 mount by yourself? Not really, unless you're a guild leader. Oh well.

    Anything meaningful in the game is only accessible to powerful guild leaders, or requires you being in a powerful guild, so not even all guild leaders/guilds will have access to all that. Really makes you think, does Steven see the game through the eyes of an ex guild leader. So if you're a powerful guild leader, that owns a castle, is a node major, you should just get all the stuff, while the rest of us, the plebs who aren't a part of their guild nor are powerful guild leaders, should just be happy with breadcrumbs, and will never get a chance to get or experience any of that.

    There's no reason why most of the valuable stuff in the game should only be reserved for a select few rich and powerful players. And there's no reason why those rich and powerful players and their guilds should be the only people that end up with access to Freeholds.
  • PherPhurPherPhur Member
    edited July 2023
    Liniker wrote: »
    only the most dedicated players will get those first freeholds, not RMTers.

    You should meet one of my friends from Indonesia who is a farmer and their large team. Dedication doesn't matter to them, they're so far beyond dedication. It's do that or live out in the jungle m8.

    Guilds aren't getting those freeholds man I'm telling you. I won't do it cause I hate RMT with a burning passion, but me and many other people have direct access to groups of farmers who 1 grand would make them lose their $%&#@%^ minds, that's like a million dollars here in the US. And it comes with Grandmaster benches so I can get rich too?

    Go to an Indonesian discord and you'll find as many people as you need, a literal army for a paycheck and anything in that game is yours.

    There's no way on earth they'll be able to know it's not just my group of friends. They aren't bots, they're real people really playing the game.

    I know they won't remove currency, or take the serious steps to getting rid of RMT, but at the very least since freeholds are such a hot topic and they're hard limited, they should be given the same way mayors are elected for each type of node. Bought for economic nodes so these P2W andys can still have their home, but by combat for military nodes and whatnot.
    5lntw0unofqp.gif
  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    iccer wrote: »
    Freeholds should absolutely be available to solo players.

    They are. You just need to put in the time and effort and farm the gold for a few months, and spend some time until you eventually win a bid.

    or you can join a guild and get access to one.

    What's not gonna happen is 50k freeholds on the server for everyone to get one at the same time.

    Ashes of Creation simply isn't that game.
    img]
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.

    Enough is the minimum amount for "ample", not the default. However, ample would suggest no need for players to fight over content, either via PvP or via competition over encounters.

    If there is that fighting over leveling content, it is because not only is there not ample content, there is not even enough content.

    Ashes design kind of dictates there not be ample overland content.
  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    You should meet one of my friends from Indonesia who is a farmer and their large team. Dedication doesn't matter to them, they're so far beyond dedication. It's do that or live out in the jungle m8.

    Didn't you just put out a thread saying intrepid should remove player to player trade and bind freeholds to stop RMT?

    Sorry I am probably going to disagree with 100% of whatever you have to say.

    Free economy is literally one of the best parts of AoC. Also, your post makes me thing you lack the knowledge if you think RMY for freeholds is an issue to be considered.

    RMT is a discussion of its own and if you think intrepid can't deal with RMT because of freehold well, I have bad news for you.

    In AoC you can literally buy the best gear in the game, flying mount eggs, mounts, battle pets, literally Everything with gold, you can buy power directly you don't need to buy a freehold to get power.


    img]
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.

    Enough is the minimum amount for "ample", not the default. However, ample would suggest no need for players to fight over content, either via PvP or via competition over encounters.

    If there is that fighting over leveling content, it is because not only is there not ample content, there is not even enough content.

    Ashes design kind of dictates there not be ample overland content.

    I think if groups want to fight over solo hunting grounds there is little to worry about - those groups are weaker than others. I think any solo player can fight for a spot at a solo hunting ground against other solos though. Its not like solo players aren't experienced, some prefer to solo level and find a guild at max level.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    I will say bidding kinda does suck for anyone who considers them casual, (im not casual player generaly btw)

    A lotto system would be better for casuals where each account that meets the requirments (Haz citizenship done the quest and so on) can buy a ticket one per account for X gold and leave it up to RNG there to who gets it. Thats fairer for casual player base but wether steven/devs want to be fairer to casual is another thing all together.

    I will say couple thing in regards to freehold
    - level 50 requirments to do the quest i think its excessive especially since leveling process is suppose to be longer and about the journey not the destination this will cause people to rush to 50 so they can qualify for Freehold. This also hinders artisan progression to a degree aswell
    - Should need to be a citizen for a node for a duration aswell before qualifing for quest or to bid on land just so people dont jump node to node just to bid on plots they should be needed to invest in a node to qualify but this might already be the case.
  • Liniker wrote: »
    iccer wrote: »
    Freeholds should absolutely be available to solo players.

    They are. You just need to put in the time and effort and farm the gold for a few months, and spend some time until you eventually win a bid.

    or you can join a guild and get access to one.

    What's not gonna happen is 50k freeholds on the server for everyone to get one at the same time.

    Ashes of Creation simply isn't that game.

    Don't even pretend like you can do the former, and as for the latter you're still only getting one with a guild if you get lucky.

    You know how much exclusive grandmaster crafting benches are going to net you? How much you can resell those houses for when the no metropolises are getting sieged, which I imagine won't be too often considering clearly the vast majority of players don't like PvP.

    You ever seen Indonesian gold farming groups play an MMO?

    ggmbilwxl4kk.jpg

    That's a small team my buddy just joined and let me tell you... when it's this 12+ hours a day or living out in the jungle, truly, watch how they play. When owning a freehold is what literally allows them to pay for their family a real home in real life.
    5lntw0unofqp.gif
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Best approach is to aim for one. Be active with your contacts. Don't wait for guild favouritism. Plot and plan with your friends first and foremost.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • @ChipsAhoy007 Do you really think you can RMT fearmonger people who played Lineage 2 against Russian RMT groups actively developing bots and running dozens of machines per person simuntaniously?

    That's just cute....
    4uu2krbr14wr.png

    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023

    You ever seen Indonesian gold farming groups play an MMO?

    Bro, I'm from Brazil you don't need to tell me about RMT in MMOs :D

    This is irrelevant for the conversation, if you don't believe intrepid can prevent RMT's impact on the game that's fine.

    But this freehold discussion has nothing to do with that, if RMT turns out to be a big thing in Ashes, freehold are the last thing to worry about for the reasons I explained above lol you can buy literal power directly with gold.
    img]
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.

    Enough is the minimum amount for "ample", not the default. However, ample would suggest no need for players to fight over content, either via PvP or via competition over encounters.

    If there is that fighting over leveling content, it is because not only is there not ample content, there is not even enough content.

    Ashes design kind of dictates there not be ample overland content.

    I think if groups want to fight over solo hunting grounds there is little to worry about - those groups are weaker than others. I think any solo player can fight for a spot at a solo hunting ground against other solos though. Its not like solo players aren't experienced, some prefer to solo level and find a guild at max level.

    I'm not saying they can or cant, should or shouldnt.

    What I am saying is if someone has to fight off another player in order to have leveling content, even the most generous use of the word "ample" is inaccurate.

    Again, saying there is "some" solo content is appropriate, not saying there is ample.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.

    Enough is the minimum amount for "ample", not the default. However, ample would suggest no need for players to fight over content, either via PvP or via competition over encounters.

    If there is that fighting over leveling content, it is because not only is there not ample content, there is not even enough content.

    Ashes design kind of dictates there not be ample overland content.

    I think if groups want to fight over solo hunting grounds there is little to worry about - those groups are weaker than others. I think any solo player can fight for a spot at a solo hunting ground against other solos though. Its not like solo players aren't experienced, some prefer to solo level and find a guild at max level.

    I'm not saying they can or cant, should or shouldnt.

    What I am saying is if someone has to fight off another player in order to have leveling content, even the most generous use of the word "ample" is inaccurate.

    Again, saying there is "some" solo content is appropriate, not saying there is ample.

    I don't get the semantics. Just because there is contestation doesn't mean it's not ample. By your logic group levelling isn't ample either due to contestation.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    How do you know it isn't ample? I levelled in a1 solo, the streamers I watch levelled solo and the devs have said you can level solo. Thus, you can level solo.

    I didnt say you couldn't.

    I said the word ample is the issue.

    Here, I'll fix your statement for you to be something I would agree with
    Neurath wrote: »
    We're not reliant on others 24/7. There are some levelling options for solo players.

    Ample means enough or more than enough. Ample means enough in my statement. There was enough to get to lvl 15 and there will be enough to get to lvl 50. Whether it's the fastest method isn't the issue. The viability and statement about 24/7 groups was the issue.

    Enough is the minimum amount for "ample", not the default. However, ample would suggest no need for players to fight over content, either via PvP or via competition over encounters.

    If there is that fighting over leveling content, it is because not only is there not ample content, there is not even enough content.

    Ashes design kind of dictates there not be ample overland content.

    I think if groups want to fight over solo hunting grounds there is little to worry about - those groups are weaker than others. I think any solo player can fight for a spot at a solo hunting ground against other solos though. Its not like solo players aren't experienced, some prefer to solo level and find a guild at max level.

    I'm not saying they can or cant, should or shouldnt.

    What I am saying is if someone has to fight off another player in order to have leveling content, even the most generous use of the word "ample" is inaccurate.

    Again, saying there is "some" solo content is appropriate, not saying there is ample.

    I don't get the semantics. Just because there is contestation doesn't mean it's not ample. By your logic group levelling isn't ample either due to contestation.

    The absolute basic definition of "ample" is "enough for everyone".

    If there is a need for people to fight, there isnt ample.

    You can say that is arguing semantics, and I would actually agree. Semantics is the study of the meaning of words. The words we use dictate the meaning of what we say. Thus, if we use the wrong words, the meaning of thw things we say is not what we wanted it to be.

    Let's say you arrive at my house for {insert national holiday here} dinner unannounced. I say "come in, sit down, there is ample food".

    Do you expect to then have to fight over said food?

    That is the correct usage of the word (assuming there is no need to fight over the food). Your usage was not. That is why I am pointing that out - the word you opted to use conveys a different meaning to the message you wanted to get across.

    Which, essentially, is semantics. But semantics are important.
  • OkeydokeOkeydoke Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Some good points in your OP Liniker. I'd like to hear from Steven some of the reasoning behind the changes. Like a glimpse at the design discussions they had about the pros and cons and "why it has to be like this" and "why it would not be good for it to be like that."

    Not having the urban sprawl of thousands upon thousands of freeholds with random mismatched skins is good. It also seems like freeholds may end up being pvp hotspots. You have to bring mats to them, and then you have to move mats from them. And you can be attacked on the freehold unless in your house. Lucrative for corruption system killers. Sounds fun.

    But that's what I'd like to hear (and I don't think we will) a more in depth discussion of why they made these changes. They're big changes. Changes that forced Steven to realize he would have to reimburse people for freehold skins. That's no small thing. There's some very compelling reason why and I'd like to know.

    It's interesting because I wasn't a fan of the recent change where corrupted players cant use their freehold storage. Now that freeholds are a more exclusive thing, likely to mostly be owned by the rich and powerful, the change doesn't bother me as much. Because I don't like to see too much power or too many perks consolidated in the hands of power gamers.

    I just hope Intrepid shares that concern some, just a little bit. And I really, really, really hope they're able to clamp down on RMT better than other games have. RMT will not be exclusive to freeholds, I know. But freeholds will be just one more very strong motivator for it.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    You have used the second definition not the primary definition. Bob has an ample chair. Phil had an ample lunch. Tom had an ample table.

    I used the primary term: there is ample space. There is ample room. There is ample progress.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Neurath wrote: »
    You have used the second definition not the primary definition. Bob has an ample chair. Phil had an ample lunch. Tom had an ample table.

    I used the primary term: there is ample space. There is ample room. There is ample progress.

    Ample still means enough, at the least.

    Again, if I am needing to fight you in order to have solo content access, it is because there is not enough solo content.

    Bob had an ample chair. If Tom then tries to sit on it as well, it is no longer ample. There is not enough space for them both.

    If either Tom or Bob gets up out of the chair, the chair is once again ample for its single occupant.
Sign In or Register to comment.