Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Freeholds and families
George_Black
Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
If the servers aim for 8000-10000 active players, and based on speculation that brings the number of freehold plots to 1900 or so, things aren't so bad. The ratio is very realistic as a matter of fact. I shouldn't be surprised by the QQing of solo people, who became backers in order to collect all those skins, thinking that the will run an mmo economy housing system like some kind of city builder game, but when I read some of those comments, well I am taken aback.
So many people treat mmos like their own tiny little worlds, and here is AoC trying to bring back the group gameplay feel of the genre.
As if 1900 families aren't enough for those 1900 or so plots of freeholds. You just need SOME kind of player to player interaction and you are in. You get to use a freehold even though you dont have the purchase power to own one (even though you think that you deserve it). Can't you use those skins in some other housing form besides freeholds?
At this point I can draw a parallel between AoC processing hubs, which will be the freeholds and ESOs trading hubs, which are the NPC auction traders owned by guilds. And I don't like to draw and parallels between AoC, which will become the best mmo and ESO, which is a singleplayer story rpgs with a generic main character, optional co-op pve instances and optional PvP instances.
And here is why we should discuss the family system of AoC in order to avoid those faceless, namesless, soulless, guilds in name only of ESO.
I think there should be some restrictions to families, in order to avoid the situation we have in ESO and the merchant guilds, in which players join a guild just for the npc merchant which allows them to sell items on the "auction house", yet there is 0 social interaction between members. Not only they are totally antisocial, they actually undercut each others prices, because that's the stupid game you get to play when you have AH in mmos....
We need to have a limited number of characters that can join a family. If some people believe that they can waste a slot for their alts, you can bet that these people won't own a freehold and you can bet that they are the ones QQings right now in all the available platforms.
I suggest 10 should be allowed in a family in order to avoid large groups of people sharing a freehold just for the benefit, or for people to charge membership fees like they do in eso. It's just lame to have 0 real interaction and yet benefit from such a system that in reality aims real social gameplay, cooperation and competition.
I also think that we should have a waiting period before you can join a family invitation. 5-7 days just so that people dont jump around to use the stations they need from the various freeholds. I also thinkk there should be a cooldown period if you leave a family for the same reasons.
If we get the situation we have in eso, we will have 0 social gameplay. Just a bunch of people abusing the system for META gains on what a freehold provides. AoC needs to implement restrictions in order to protect the social aspect of the genre, as well as the risk v reward mentality of the game. No more NPC gameplay, circumventing players.
Lastly, a comment on the ownership of a freehold and the conditions of losing it.
I disagree that you should lose your freehold upon a failed node siege defense. Yes, it will be ruined and looted, but people/families shouldn't lose control of a freehold plot, especially due to the amount of dedication it takes to set up a freehold. What will players do if they have all these systems in place and one day the can't find another freehold? "Go and attack a node..." No. People will be turned off.
Destroyed and rebuild is ok. Losing access to a freehold plot is a bad design. MMOs are not for new players. This is not an excuse to try to sweeten the pill for people that start on a server 1-2 years after launch. People need access to new freeholds? Open a new server.
Now what about the people that own a freehold, but leave the game or the server? I think there should be compulsory to perform a series of tasks once per month to maintain your freehold, otherwise the account should lose control of it. Not just an email "log back in other wise you will lose your freehold", not that's too easy for people to cling on to them. If some decides that they don't want to play actively this mmo, then they need to let go. They are no longer a part of the community and they don't deserve to hold a plot.
So many people treat mmos like their own tiny little worlds, and here is AoC trying to bring back the group gameplay feel of the genre.
As if 1900 families aren't enough for those 1900 or so plots of freeholds. You just need SOME kind of player to player interaction and you are in. You get to use a freehold even though you dont have the purchase power to own one (even though you think that you deserve it). Can't you use those skins in some other housing form besides freeholds?
At this point I can draw a parallel between AoC processing hubs, which will be the freeholds and ESOs trading hubs, which are the NPC auction traders owned by guilds. And I don't like to draw and parallels between AoC, which will become the best mmo and ESO, which is a singleplayer story rpgs with a generic main character, optional co-op pve instances and optional PvP instances.
And here is why we should discuss the family system of AoC in order to avoid those faceless, namesless, soulless, guilds in name only of ESO.
I think there should be some restrictions to families, in order to avoid the situation we have in ESO and the merchant guilds, in which players join a guild just for the npc merchant which allows them to sell items on the "auction house", yet there is 0 social interaction between members. Not only they are totally antisocial, they actually undercut each others prices, because that's the stupid game you get to play when you have AH in mmos....
We need to have a limited number of characters that can join a family. If some people believe that they can waste a slot for their alts, you can bet that these people won't own a freehold and you can bet that they are the ones QQings right now in all the available platforms.
I suggest 10 should be allowed in a family in order to avoid large groups of people sharing a freehold just for the benefit, or for people to charge membership fees like they do in eso. It's just lame to have 0 real interaction and yet benefit from such a system that in reality aims real social gameplay, cooperation and competition.
I also think that we should have a waiting period before you can join a family invitation. 5-7 days just so that people dont jump around to use the stations they need from the various freeholds. I also thinkk there should be a cooldown period if you leave a family for the same reasons.
If we get the situation we have in eso, we will have 0 social gameplay. Just a bunch of people abusing the system for META gains on what a freehold provides. AoC needs to implement restrictions in order to protect the social aspect of the genre, as well as the risk v reward mentality of the game. No more NPC gameplay, circumventing players.
Lastly, a comment on the ownership of a freehold and the conditions of losing it.
I disagree that you should lose your freehold upon a failed node siege defense. Yes, it will be ruined and looted, but people/families shouldn't lose control of a freehold plot, especially due to the amount of dedication it takes to set up a freehold. What will players do if they have all these systems in place and one day the can't find another freehold? "Go and attack a node..." No. People will be turned off.
Destroyed and rebuild is ok. Losing access to a freehold plot is a bad design. MMOs are not for new players. This is not an excuse to try to sweeten the pill for people that start on a server 1-2 years after launch. People need access to new freeholds? Open a new server.
Now what about the people that own a freehold, but leave the game or the server? I think there should be compulsory to perform a series of tasks once per month to maintain your freehold, otherwise the account should lose control of it. Not just an email "log back in other wise you will lose your freehold", not that's too easy for people to cling on to them. If some decides that they don't want to play actively this mmo, then they need to let go. They are no longer a part of the community and they don't deserve to hold a plot.
0
Comments
The aim is for 10k concurrent players.
This means at least 20k active players. More likely 25 - 30k.
Ironically, there would have been enough freeholds for 30k people in family's of 10 if the freeholds stayed at 0.5 hectares lol.
Before you post those lengthy threats, maybe look up the wiki because there is a section about families. Tldr: 8 max members (9 with a merriage). And a timer if you leave a family and want to join a new one.
I don't know. Can we? Hopefully we can, because at the moment I feel like I paid for something I didn't fully appreciate I might not be able to use.
keep in mind, that that's their max server capacity for concurrent players, after launch it will drop to 5k~6k average and during prime time or big events it might get to 10k
While true, it still means a total server population of over 20k.
Thus, attempting to justify a system as being perfectly fine for servers with 8k populations doesnt ait well with me.
As I said in my first post though, I only read that much of the OP. I didn't (and still dont) see the point of reading an attempt at rationalizing a clearly flawed (or unfinished) system using such baseless assumed numbers.
The system is fine and families are capped at 8, you could tell years ago Steven was going to push hard to encourage teamwork and won't back down from that.
They're also so desired that they were the perfect things to make scarce and have tied to the life of a node so as to encourage sieges because it's paramount that sieges occur, the game is fundamentally built around it. At the moment there is almost no reason to siege especially considering the majority of players hate PvP or avoid it like the plague.
That being said, freeholds are a shell of a potentially AMAZING game mechanic considering the exclusive grandmaster benches, ability to make money with them, and RMT'ing combined.
Everyone is worried about not having one or only big guilds having them. When who should really be complaining is the big guilds who will do so much work to lose property to foreign farmers monopolizing the whole system.
They need to mimic mayoral election systems for initial freehold acquisition. More fun that way anyways, plus it still encourages teamwork.