Why should I fight for my node?

bloodprophet wrote: »

To many doomsayers trying to find a less then 1% whataboutthis...

First, I never said something like that. If you're gonna have a conversation in this thread at least be open about it, if not please leave.

bloodprophet wrote: »

Various node types will also have various benefits available only to it's citizens.
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Nodes#Citizenship_benefits

If you have an economic metro and lie the auction house being there would you seek to protect it?
The science metro with it's limited teleport and air ship?
What if some of these things require you to be a citizen to use or pay a toll to get on the air ship?

I made this point. I can see all these benefits. Are you telling me no one will want to own a static house or freehold? In real life you have many examples where people sought the destruction of their own empire to benefit from it.
What is the benefit if I protect the node? None. Just to keep the status quo. If I am some random adventurer, or someone who benefits from the node, are those benefits large enough to justifiy defending my node? That is the question I am asking.

BlackBrony wrote: »

Considering numbers given, freeholds or housing will be limited to select few. Being that the case, what is the motivation to fight for my node?
If having my node destroyed gives the small chance to get a Freehold or static housing, why would I fight for my node? The potential gains seem to be so much higher than having some mats destroyed that I store in my instanced housing.

Am I missing something here? Please correct me if I'm mistaken about something.

I think the answer is that you shouldn't join a node if you can't get a housing or freehold in it. I think that's what they're going for. Players start populating a node looking for housing and freeholds until it either fills up or getting them becomes unfeasible, and the remaining players move on to greener pastures elsewhere.

If they didn't do this, everyone would just migrate to a central commercial node and becomes citizens there. You must have noticed that in other MMOs with multiple major towns or "capital cities" that everyone sets their home to the city that is in the most convenient location and/or has the highest population and everywhere else is a ghost town.

It also would create an interesting situation for the governors of the nodes, because they'll only be able to attract as many citizens as they have housing and freeholds available. So they'll have to do some balance work with commercial buildings, utility buildings and housing.

So, the answer is that you fight for your node because that's where your home and all your stuff is.

pgt1027 wrote: »

BlackBrony wrote: »

Considering numbers given, freeholds or housing will be limited to select few. Being that the case, what is the motivation to fight for my node?
If having my node destroyed gives the small chance to get a Freehold or static housing, why would I fight for my node? The potential gains seem to be so much higher than having some mats destroyed that I store in my instanced housing.

Am I missing something here? Please correct me if I'm mistaken about something.

I think the answer is that you shouldn't join a node if you can't get a housing or freehold in it. I think that's what they're going for. Players start populating a node looking for housing and freeholds until it either fills up or getting them becomes unfeasible, and the remaining players move on to greener pastures elsewhere.

Such an excellent point! So people will be "forced" to move elsewhere into the world in hopes of getting a static house or a freehold. I already discard freeholds because you can only get them at level 50, so for casuals that possibility is gone completely.
But that idea makes sense. It might give some chances to other players, depending how large the hardcore base is.

pgt1027 wrote: »

So, the answer is that you fight for your node because that's where your home and all your stuff is.

What stuff are you referring to? There are central banks in each node. I would store armour for the various local dungeons in the local banks. No point carting stuff across the entire map. The rest of the 'stuff' isn't really too serious, perhaps furniture for a home I don't own or perhaps resources which will be sold immediately or stored in local banks for repairs later on. I don't see the rest of the 'stuff' you refer to.

Ludullu

Apartments will still be a thing. Housing will potentially bring several benefits of its own and changing houses every time your node gets destroyed would be very costly for casual players.

In other words - it's convenience. You want your game to be as easy-going as possible? Defend your node.

NiKr wrote: »

Apartments will still be a thing. Housing will potentially bring several benefits of its own and changing houses every time your node gets destroyed would be very costly for casual players.

In other words - it's convenience. You want your game to be as easy-going as possible? Defend your node.

Let me rephrase my question. Would you be willing to lose 1000 dollars if that means you might get 1 million? I see "defending my node" as that. If I only have a instanced house, what am I really losing? Is this convenience you talk about THAT important compared to the chance of belonging to that 15% of players who own a static house or freehold?

NiKr wrote: »

In other words - it's convenience. You want your game to be as easy-going as possible? Defend your node.

Its not too convenient though. You could be on the opposite continent and have to cart your day's haul all the way back to your house. Or you could just use the local banks, find an auction house or sell the stuff in the local merchant shops. In a PvX game, travel should only be undertaken when travel is unavoidable. If I owned a house, I'd have to travel one way and then travel back again lol.

tautau

@Neurath When you say 'I won't join a node because I only get the benefits of one type of node rather than all five types of nodes' slightly off point?

Wouldn't it be better to say 'If I join a node I get the benefit of one type of node and if I don't join a node I get the benefit of zero types of node?'

Yes, you could state that fact Tautau but we begin without citizenship. Thus, Citizenship isn't really required. It only becomes good in later stages of development. But, my forces could destroy said node in a siege rather than take the knee and defend the node. Thus, the benefits of the siege would outweigh the menial benefits of the citizenship. I expect the next node updates could invalid my current stance, however, I just don't see the benefits to be worth the gold sinks, time sinks and effort required to make a house a home. I'm all for Guild Wars, but, I don't particularly want to fight the wars of others such as Node Wars because I'll never become a Mayor. Easier to take your lot in life when you have full control over engagements and disengagements

Ludullu

BlackBrony wrote: »

Let me rephrase my question. Would you be willing to lose 1000 dollars if that means you might get 1 million? I see "defending my node" as that. If I only have a instanced house, what am I really losing? Is this convenience you talk about THAT important compared to the chance of belonging to that 15% of players who own a static house or freehold?

If you have the money for it and you know FOR SURE that you have more than any given guild within a reasonable radius of the node - yeah, it'd be better to try and buy it after the node gets destroyed. But if you have access to that kind of money - why da hell are you not on a freehold already?

Neurath wrote: »

Its not too convenient though. You could be on the opposite continent and have to cart your day's haul all the way back to your house. Or you could just use the local banks, find an auction house or sell the stuff in the local merchant shops. In a PvX game, travel should only be undertaken when travel is unavoidable. If I owned a house, I'd have to travel one way and then travel back again lol.

This will depend on the overall availability of instanced housing across all nodes and on your own preferences for content.

If Intrepid decide to give everyone at least an instanced home, that would mean that all nodes will have ~900 apartments on average (or at least median). So unless you're trying to live in the most overpopulated node on the server - I doubt you'll have to walk more than 20 minutes from your farming spot to your home.

Neurath wrote: »

pgt1027 wrote: »

So, the answer is that you fight for your node because that's where your home and all your stuff is.

What stuff are you referring to? There are central banks in each node. I would store armour for the various local dungeons in the local banks. No point carting stuff across the entire map. The rest of the 'stuff' isn't really too serious, perhaps furniture for a home I don't own or perhaps resources which will be sold immediately or stored in local banks for repairs later on. I don't see the rest of the 'stuff' you refer to.

I'm saying you wouldn't become a citizen of a node you can't get housing in. So you would have either a house, apartment or freehold in the node you became a citizen in. You fight for your node because if your node is destroyed, your house, apartment or freehold will be destroyed with it. There are a few other benefits to becoming a citizen of a node beyond housing, but access to housing seems to be by far the most compelling reason to become a citizen and that's what you're fighting for when you defend your node.

BlackBrony wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

Apartments will still be a thing. Housing will potentially bring several benefits of its own and changing houses every time your node gets destroyed would be very costly for casual players.

In other words - it's convenience. You want your game to be as easy-going as possible? Defend your node.

Let me rephrase my question. Would you be willing to lose 1000 dollars if that means you might get 1 million? I see "defending my node" as that. If I only have a instanced house, what am I really losing? Is this convenience you talk about THAT important compared to the chance of belonging to that 15% of players who own a static house or freehold?

Are static houses actually superior to apartments beyond the "cool factor" of having your housing be a part of the open world?

pgt1027 wrote: »

Neurath wrote: »

pgt1027 wrote: »

So, the answer is that you fight for your node because that's where your home and all your stuff is.

What stuff are you referring to? There are central banks in each node. I would store armour for the various local dungeons in the local banks. No point carting stuff across the entire map. The rest of the 'stuff' isn't really too serious, perhaps furniture for a home I don't own or perhaps resources which will be sold immediately or stored in local banks for repairs later on. I don't see the rest of the 'stuff' you refer to.

I'm saying you wouldn't become a citizen of a node you can't get housing in. So you would have either a house, apartment or freehold in the node you became a citizen in. You fight for your node because if your node is destroyed, your house, apartment or freehold will be destroyed with it. There are a few other benefits to becoming a citizen of a node beyond housing, but access to housing seems to be by far the most compelling reason to become a citizen and that's what you're fighting for when you defend your node.

I've come from MMOs without housing systems as well as MMOs with housing systems. I just don't see the appeal of a house. A freehold I mulled over because my Alt would be a Processer but that wasn't for the home aspect, it was a business choice. I don't see homes/housing as an integral part of an MMO experience. If I want to build a home I'll play The Sims. If we go corrupted we can't access a lot of stuff anyway so I guess I'd be a roamer like a corrupted player with the freedom to go corrupted if required.

NiKr wrote: »

If you have the money for it and you know FOR SURE that you have more than any given guild within a reasonable radius of the node - yeah, it'd be better to try and buy it after the node gets destroyed. But if you have access to that kind of money - why da hell are you not on a freehold already?

Well, you might be able to acquire an instanced house at cheaper price, since that is tied to the number of citizens the node has.
Also when a node is destroyed it goes back to zero. Maybe it won't be "hot property" anymore, because it requires lots of work before the node grows and provides benefits. Maybe prices will go down after destruction. It's not the same to buy a house in a node 4 than on a node 1.

Ludullu

BlackBrony wrote: »

Well, you might be able to acquire an instanced house at cheaper price, since that is tied to the number of citizens the node has.
Also when a node is destroyed it goes back to zero. Maybe it won't be "hot property" anymore, because it requires lots of work before the node grows and provides benefits. Maybe prices will go down after destruction. It's not the same to buy a house in a node 4 than on a node 1.

It is for a freehold though. Freehold is a freehold and for any guild that's gonna be an investment. If anything, there's a high chance that guilds will siege the nodes where they haven't bought up all the freeholds just to do exactly that.

Neurath wrote: »

pgt1027 wrote: »

Neurath wrote: »

pgt1027 wrote: »

So, the answer is that you fight for your node because that's where your home and all your stuff is.

What stuff are you referring to? There are central banks in each node. I would store armour for the various local dungeons in the local banks. No point carting stuff across the entire map. The rest of the 'stuff' isn't really too serious, perhaps furniture for a home I don't own or perhaps resources which will be sold immediately or stored in local banks for repairs later on. I don't see the rest of the 'stuff' you refer to.

I'm saying you wouldn't become a citizen of a node you can't get housing in. So you would have either a house, apartment or freehold in the node you became a citizen in. You fight for your node because if your node is destroyed, your house, apartment or freehold will be destroyed with it. There are a few other benefits to becoming a citizen of a node beyond housing, but access to housing seems to be by far the most compelling reason to become a citizen and that's what you're fighting for when you defend your node.

I've come from MMOs without housing systems as well as MMOs with housing systems. I just don't see the appeal of a house. A freehold I mulled over because my Alt would be a Processer but that wasn't for the home aspect, it was a business choice. I don't see homes/housing as an integral part of an MMO experience. If I want to build a home I'll play The Sims. If we go corrupted we can't access a lot of stuff anyway so I guess I'd be a roamer like a corrupted player with the freedom to go corrupted if required.

I don't disagree with this view. A lot of MMORPGs are based on heroic fantasy, and I'd argue that the true home of heroic fantasy adventurers is the local tavern. I think the idea of just letting players be wandering adventurers is something the game should support.

That said, it looks like the housing is going to come with a few pretty major benefits, such as the furniture giving you various buffs or utility, your bed giving you some kind of rested experience/buff for free and I assume certain higher level crafting benches. At least, if we assume that the stuff that was inside the freehold houses will also be available inside static houses and apartments. It's also worth noting that being a citizen of a node will also give you access to certain higher level crafting benches whether you own a house or not, so while not really a reason to defend your node, it's a reason to become a citizen, at least if you're going to go deep into the crafting profession system.

pgt1027 wrote: »

BlackBrony wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

Apartments will still be a thing. Housing will potentially bring several benefits of its own and changing houses every time your node gets destroyed would be very costly for casual players.

In other words - it's convenience. You want your game to be as easy-going as possible? Defend your node.

Let me rephrase my question. Would you be willing to lose 1000 dollars if that means you might get 1 million? I see "defending my node" as that. If I only have a instanced house, what am I really losing? Is this convenience you talk about THAT important compared to the chance of belonging to that 15% of players who own a static house or freehold?

Are static houses actually superior to apartments beyond the "cool factor" of having your housing be a part of the open world?

Power, exclusivity, access to a select few group. Plus if you own a house you could trade or get enough gold for a Freehold.
The wiki says "Apartments are internal only (instanced) spaces within a node that offer some housing functionality.[4] "
Not sure if there's a difference though

No one has said you have to be a citizen to join a family to my knowledge. You can just join forces with someone who is a citizen and get a freehold. There really are work around for a lot of issues right now. The game is leakier than a sive.

tautau

Technical point: If a node is sieged and loses, it goes to level 0. Since a node must be level 3 to have freeholds, there will be no freeholds to purchase after the siege, or for quite a while until the node regains level 3.

What will probably happen is that other nodes, adjacent to the one destroyed in the siege, will now be able to grow larger. If the 'next node over' is level 2, it may grow to level 3 and soon sell freeholds.