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.
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.
Comments
I dont often post my predictions on the game, even though many of them turn out to be right.
In this case though, I am going to.
My prediction is that the change that will happen (most people look at this system understanding that *something* needs to change) is that players with rights to place a freehold somewhere in a very large piece of land will be able to sell/lease the rights for other players to place a half acre freehold somewhere in that same very large piece of land.
The above is my prediction, the following is more a possible implementation of the basic system.
If freeholds can be bought at node stage 3, when that node hits stage 4 players will be able to sell or lease one smaller freehold. At stage 5 they double that and can add one more, then at stage 6 they double it again for a total of 4 additional plots.
From there, when this is added to the game, I'd like to see a range of lease options - fixed term, perpetual, first right of refusal of the owner of the "big house" decides to sell, etc.
I'd also like to see options for which party decides where the smaller freehold is located. If the owner of the "big house" wants all the associated freeholds nearby to form a small player town, go for it. If the person with the smaller freehold wants to build a long way away, they can come to an agreement with the owner to that end.
The main reason for this is that land ownership is likely to be the main way players interact with the games economy system - as much of a draw card to many players as PvP is (I'm sure PvP players would be pissed if they found out that actually only 2k players at a time can meaningfully participate in PvP, you need to wait for them to leave the game to join in).
While some layers may just offer these smaller freeholds to their friends or guildmates, that still lowers the number of freeholds that group of friends or that guild would want.
It also significantly increases the number of people that give a shit about a node and its survival. While people may become citizens of a node for religion or organization reasons, if that node is destroyed it is just a matter of joining another appropriate node. The barrier to entry is low - in contrast to thosenownong a freehold, many of whom may never own one again if the node loses a siege.
So yeah, that is my prediction.
Yes, you can defend node because it's fun. Of course it's fun. But it's also fun to see it destroyed and be able to get more rewards if that happens.
That's why I am asking why should I defend it.
Economy node you will probaly need to be citizen ship to list items on them i suspect aswell, buying from AH probaly wont need it but listing items probaly will
gotta be the citizen of a node to do the quest to allow one to buy a freehold and if they do it right they would also make it so you need to be a citizen for a duration before u even qualify for it so people cant bounce around looking for freeholds.
No, i was correct. you can bid on a parcel without being a citizen according to Discord Q+A.
yeah makes sense to me now that i think about it i didnt read any of the discord Q/A only what was in the livestream but if i recall housing is a requirement for citizenship so yes you are correct here and i was mistaken
If you are attacking you cannot get rewards if the siege is defensed successfully likewise, the inverse is true. You will want to defend/attack for a variety of selfish/communal benefits based off a swath of motivations. In addition, sieges are just fun. Folks will be lining up to join or leave nodes to participate in sieges simply for that.
But yes, sometimes the bottom ones benefit from regime changes and have to be lured with money to do the fighting.
Not from the war itself, but you can benefit by having potential access to bid on a house or freehold. Plus the more nodes are destroyed, the more money the large guilds are spending
What is not from the war itself?
Static housing and freeholds are lost when node is destroyed.
Tons of materials are lost when a node is destroyed.
Those things create opportunities for selling goods, materials and many things.
Even carrying shit around will be a service. Someone could pay you to transfer max inventory of materials. Yes, you could die, but would only lose X% if you fight back.
agre, but there are some reasons to join, for example, joining the military node lets you become a bounty hunter etc
because you or your freinds might have a freehold in said node. you might also have stuff stored in that node and you dont want the node to be destroyed so that other people wont lose your stuff. also, you have a developed node so you dont want to lose that as well..
I mean, we have made Freeholds very lucrative, and if there is none to be had, well... I foresee a lot of people suddenly being busy elsewhere on the day of the siege. Or even have their alts join in on the other side. In fact, with how petty people can be, it wouldn't even suprise me if the people that cant even afford one will also stay out of it based on a "if I cant have it, why should they?"-mentality. People can be really nasty critters sometimes :S
ok you betray me, my freehold gets destroyed. now you dont have access to my services, you arent guaranteed to get one, because other people might outbid you, and on top of that, even if oyu did get it, do yo think people are going to help you retain it after all that? enjoy your freehold for one month. probably not enough time to progress the buildings inside it.
None of these are practical reasons.
First, if you aren't a citizen of a node, you are unlikely to leave too much there - purely being sieges are a thing. Sure, in some games you may want to base yourself in a node, but if there is no actual reason to do that in Ashes, you won't. If you are not based in any node, you will make sure you are spread out in order to minimize loss in a siege.
The notion of a node being built up is a possibility - but it is a pretty poor reason. There are other nodes that are built up as well - and if not becoming a citizen is the way you are playing the game, then there is no issue at all in just heading over towards another node.
Quite honestly, if I do not have a freehold and thus aren't a citizen (I don't see any point in becoming a citizen short of owning a freehold) and the node I am currently based in is put under siege, I probably wouldn't even wait around for the siege - I'd just get what ever I have in storage there and move on to another node.
At best, I'd hang around to sell some resources that are in high demand with a siege in order to make a bit of profit.
But yes, if that is the way it goes, clearly no one will have their freehold very long, and no one will be very happy. That much is very true. Which is part of why the thought concerns me so.
are we talking about defending the node you are citizien of, or defending your own node?
if you arent a citizen of the node being attacked, it might still be benefitial to defend it if you have an alliance with that node, since they can help defend yours.
random node the other side of the map with no alliances to yours? probably not
With the way things are looking now, most people won't bother with node citizenship. The reason to become a citizen has always been to have a freehold. Since you don't need to be a citizen in order to bid, the play for basically everyone will be to remain a non-citizen unless/until they get a freehold somewhere.
If you are not a citizen of any node, there is no point in trying to have some mutual defence pact with any given node - you have no node you want them to come to the defence of.
you get benefits for being a citizen of a node. for me, and probably other people, becoming a citizen wasnt about a freehold, it was about either becoming a bounty hunter (if you join a military node) or progress in a religion and get augments (combat strength). i wasnt really interested in scientific or economic nodes, but i believe you need to be a citizen of those nodes to be able to buy some recipes. so yeah there are still incentives to become a citizen of a node, other than getting a freehold .-.
you probably dont want a metropolis to be destroyed since you will lose access to its perks
The only way the religious or social organization augments are going to be worth being a citizen is if they have their own augment slot.
The thing is, with religion, social organizations and bounty hunters, there still isn't a reason to defend a node.
If you become a citizen to be a bounty hunter and that node is destroyed, just become a citizen of another military node. If it is a religion or social organization, become a citizen of a node that has those buildings. Nothing lost on your part.
Now, to be fair, there are still relics. The thing is, does anyone here believe that someone unable to get a freehold in Ashes will have any real means of interacting with a relic?
This leaves the only reason to give a shit about a node surviving a siege is if you have land there.
If you have no land there, you have no reason at all to care. Defending a node in that situation is a waste of your time and resources. You are better off served by just moving on.
I am of the understanding that once a siege is declared, all resource containers become locked. (For resources and materials at least) You can’t just grab your things and bail.
Depending on how much you have stored will determine the level of incentive you have to defend the node.