Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Freehold Bidding System Needs Changed
BlackSheep77
Member
I'm seeing a lot about people not liking the freehold bidding system. Most of the people seem to be against not being able to own a freehold at all, which by the looks of it, many people won't due to it's limited nature. However through families most people can?
If so that is really cool because it encourages teamwork, something lacking in modern day massive multiplayer games. While theoretically still giving freehold co-ownership access to all or almost all people
But people are talking about buying gold in the game to afford freeholds since it will take such huge effort to own one. This is a problem I think because I've played and seen other MMOs, some that have tried so hard to stop gold buying and can't. I remember Runescape even tried only allowing players to make somewhat fair trades which ended up terrible because people couldn't trade their friends or gift people things.
So considering gold buying will be an unfortunate aspect of the game, wouldn't it make sense to go about players getting a freehold in another way that also encourages teamwork. One that would much less likely to be able to be bought with real life money. The node advancement is done by doing tasks in the area IIRC, like profession tasks, quests, ect. You don't have to pay to have a node upgraded.
And the same for the mayors, all but the economic stage anyways lol.
You don't have to pay to build a boat or pay for dragons(those are just rare drops right or got from being the king of a castle)
There has to be a better system for getting a freehold that's still team based. It feels like leaving it up to bidding is asking for gold buyers. And people including Steven are saying that all trading is subject to gold buyers which is true but out of everything I can think of freeholds are probably the worst things you could possibly streamline to them. Considering they are limited somewhat as well, so desired and able to make a lot of money with from what I've heard.
Can't there be a way that's not based around gold or trading?
If so that is really cool because it encourages teamwork, something lacking in modern day massive multiplayer games. While theoretically still giving freehold co-ownership access to all or almost all people
But people are talking about buying gold in the game to afford freeholds since it will take such huge effort to own one. This is a problem I think because I've played and seen other MMOs, some that have tried so hard to stop gold buying and can't. I remember Runescape even tried only allowing players to make somewhat fair trades which ended up terrible because people couldn't trade their friends or gift people things.
So considering gold buying will be an unfortunate aspect of the game, wouldn't it make sense to go about players getting a freehold in another way that also encourages teamwork. One that would much less likely to be able to be bought with real life money. The node advancement is done by doing tasks in the area IIRC, like profession tasks, quests, ect. You don't have to pay to have a node upgraded.
And the same for the mayors, all but the economic stage anyways lol.
You don't have to pay to build a boat or pay for dragons(those are just rare drops right or got from being the king of a castle)
There has to be a better system for getting a freehold that's still team based. It feels like leaving it up to bidding is asking for gold buyers. And people including Steven are saying that all trading is subject to gold buyers which is true but out of everything I can think of freeholds are probably the worst things you could possibly streamline to them. Considering they are limited somewhat as well, so desired and able to make a lot of money with from what I've heard.
Can't there be a way that's not based around gold or trading?
1
Comments
All that Intrepit needs to do is to make a phasing system like that in WoW.
Yes I say "all they need to do" and I have no clue how much work that would the programmers take tbh.
But the upside will be worth it.
People play much longer if they can not only have their freehold but also in the place they want.
There are about 4 or 5 freehold places really high up on the ice-covered upper regions or even on the peak of a vast mountain that overshadows a big part of the gameworld!
So this place is obviously all the rage for everyone who wants to build god knows what there.
I do not know much about freeholds yet, appart from that they exist.
So I dunno if the system will go all PAX DEI on us ( which would be hella awesome ) but especially with the phasing system in place that I imagine, it will be huuuuuuuuuge to see what people create on an awesome location with a breathtaking view.
Players can have about one or two freehold "layers" on the server, not SPOTS/SLOTS or PLACES.
Just the layers.
And a layer is, as the name suggests, a layered instance of the freehold which is first and foremost only exclusive to yourself for now.
Only one layer can be the "dominant" one for a certain amount of time. Maybe a reallife day or so.
And then it switches and shows the freehold of another player who has randomely build their own freehold in the same location.
This way very popular spots can be handed out several times to players on the same server.
You can chose as the founder/creator of a layer if you want to share it with others and allow others to change, build and influence it too. You must always type in the name of the players and the system will find them for you on the server you are on.
Other players can also chose which layer they want to see either all the time, or which one's they never want to see no matter how often they come around a certain spot.
Show only the layers of
"guildmembers/friends/particular player/all players/random players/players you have no special ties with"
to mix and match what type of freehold/s you like to see.
So remember if you want to see only the freeholds of people that you prefer, only their layers will be chosen to be the "dominant" one you can see for the duration of that day.
And you can never see or look around the one's not meeting any criteria you have chosen.
And if you only want to see one particular freehold there, chose the founders name.
I hope that was clear.
They probably have several schemes in mind as possibilities and have chosen the one they think will work best in the game. If it doesn't work in early A2, we will see something else tested in later A2, which may or may not make it unchanged to release.
LoL. And why not? What's the harm?
People being satisfied? Apart from you for some reason?
Please tell cause I cannot think of a drawback.
Appart from some no-lifing narcicists being afraid their freehold won't be the only exclusive one in a spot, after SWEATLORDING the first hours or days, or even weeks of Ashes and then having hogged a spot by sheer no-life, ( did I already mentioned the NO-LIFING? ^_^ ) and not been looked at forever in envy or spite?
Cause this is the only drawback I can imagine for why someone wouldn't want a good layered system?
Of course I am not oblivious to the fact that the Garrison phasing in WoW's Warlords of Draenor was a disaster and came with ugly lagspikes, due to it "being the only housing spot in the entire game".
And it really was locationbound.
The phasing system could not fully keep up at rush hours.
But I doubt that 90% of a servers location will all chose the same spot.
If yes... well then better regret having chosen something than to regret being unable to.
Let me tell you if freeholds become a highly contest thing, a lot of people will stop caring and they might chose to leave the game earlier because of it.
Then again my freehold knowledge is still too limited.
Maybe they won't even look that awesome anyway or their use will be just surprisingly mediocre.
And we are speaking about nothing here.
Nothing that will overly excite us for long when the time has come.
Could also be.
I find it hilarious when people come to the forums of an mmorpg that is being funded by former """sweatlord""" guild leader that reads these conversations, with many of the AoC developers also falling in that category,
and people with their huge 400 IQ brain think its actually a good idea when they are giving feedback to insult and make fun of hardcore players, guild leaders, and make those statements thinking this is going to do them any favours 😂😂
carry on,
Its simple just support raids on territories and than pvp to take spots. If someone has something you want there is no reason to not pvp and try to take it.
Sounds like easer bidding for people to win than and a desire to not claim more for just the sake of doing it. While keeping the people that want them more easily obtainable.
This was a 100% explanation with 0% insults. Facts aren't insults.
No-lifers think they are all the rage when in fact barely anyone cares about them. Games have to attract mostly people who want to relax if they wanna stay relevant for a long time.
If there is too much sweatlord content in the game and not enough chill content, people jump off fast.
How about just saying yes you wanna show off and feel like the King of the literal hill.
Nothing wrong about that. But do not act like it wouldn't be all for ego and me pointing it out is bullying or insulting or something around the lines.
But I admit that I do not know much about freeholds yet and from what I've read here... I come to more & more doubt they will be tha~t exciting. Only time will tell.
just so you know, they did a big stream on Freeholds back in July,
stream video:
https://ashesofcreation.com/news/2023-07-01-development-update-with-freehold-preview
article:
https://ashesofcreation.com/news/2023-07-14-exploring-the-boundless-opportunities-of-freeholds
The reason for my current Vampire esthetic is V Rising.
A game in which there where PvP & PvE servers. Most players got really deep into the castle building scene of it and did not played the game for the PvP aspects of it.
On some servers you could always destroy castles. On others you simply could not.
On servers where you could, castles were build around repelling attacks, became ugly honeycomb meta abominations and never looked pleasing and immersive.
And now the fanbase pretty much made it sound like "nodes are shared among everyone but freeholds are private houses for players".
But there will not be a PvE server system for Ashes.
I love the game though. Everything what I saw from it so far and do not want that players abandon it because PvP always "wrecks their houses".
I've got a ton of questions around the whole ordeal but they all boil down to one thing.
And that is; Will owning a freehold feel like a fun thing or will it feel so obnoxious that one cannot be bothered if they do NOT have +10 other players at the ready, 10/24 hours every day, or else their freehold gets taken from them by another group of players?
To say it in the words of the wise balding man Asmongold
" MMO's somehow need to cater to everyone which is a very hard thing to do.
There needs to be allure for the no-lifer sweatlords the same as for the most casual of casuals. I feel WoW classic had that. "
Although I guess people will have no problem owning a freehold if they have to join a massive guild for that owns half the server, or whatever a single guild can own in total.
And it's other six "child branches" that might even be named like the innitial guild just with a number written at the end... but do not fight each other so that they can all just access everything at the same time or some stuff.
The wierd meta's that pop up in my head already and nothing is confirmed anyway.
Oh well. Only time will tell.
But...
Casual motivation > PvP competitive aspect
This is why Sea of Thieves has most recently introduced "Safer Sea's" too and the ambushers are fuming.
Rare acknowledged that many players just want to enjoy the game's beauty in peace.
Get in as many players as possible to be mesmerized by the Ashes of Creation.
After this much of a wait the last thing I want is this game to have another "Sea of Thieves journey" with the community being divided for years and the evermore deteriorating tone also making people quit cause they think this is just another toxic hardcore PvP game.
Sweet. I realise i don't have all the Oversight yet. Probably only Alpha Two and above will truly help me out. Not wanting to sound lazy here, though.
Housing is designed more towards the pvp element with PvX between obtaining, keeping and destroying them. AoC is PvX and Freeholds is end game content ontop of it so it makes sense. There is normal housing people can have and decorate.
damn this thread is alive again.
or..theres enough sweatlords to fill up the 10k population with just sweatlords...you cant have all 8 billion people interested in a game, so you make the game for a group of players. maybe this game is not for the same audience who would enjoy palia
saying that people who keep the game alive are the casuals, carebears and the tomato farmers isnt true. people who log in everyday and play for a few hours and do a different things keep the game alive.
fyi most people prefer cooperative-competitive games over cooperative only or competitive only. so yeah the guy who just logs in 2 hours a week to farm tomatoes and then logs off isnt what keeps the game alive.
anyways, back to freeholds. the reason not everyone can get a freehold is not because intrepid didnt think about layering or instancing, its because they dont want to. you cant see why the limitation, but guess what? the developers can. they are the only ones with all the information about the game, not us. right now, the limitation is for (economic) balancing reasons. to not introduce 438574753457 items to the game in a nano second.
anyways we just have to wait for a2
But isn't that exactly what is done by casuals mostly? The no-lifers are always online anyway!
Ah~ it already happened again and I let my hype for the game turn into a twisted worry due to stuff I've seen happening in games with similar content.
Must still watch the other half of that 2 hour youtube video featuring the nodes.
It was way too early for me to get paranoid and worried.
The biggest part of my knowledge came from YouTube comments. What was I doing?
The community there went wild already and acted like this was going to be PAX DEI for freeholds. ^^
But what surprises me the most about freeholds is that the best workstations are supposed to be there?
Like WHAT? WHAT!?!
Imagine the players build some kind of capitol/metropolis with the highest city type node level.
And it is a HUUUUGE city that might be the absolute, most impressive looking city on the entire server.
How come that the best "forge" for example isn't also there? It is THE CITY!!
Why would some PLEB players
Must know the reasoning behind it.
Every single Player on a single Server being an absolute Sweatlord ? x'D
Sounds more like i imagine a Warhammer40K MMO to run, instead of Ashes of Creation ... ... 😅
Elitism.
Which would be a very lame, smug & boring reason.
Finished the video for it too. [ Development Update with Freehold Preview - 11AM PT Friday, June 30, 2023 ]
So there is a little bit of cosmetic freedom and they are similar to the garrison in WoW.
You can process stuff there at your own workstations and also grow ressources you might otherwise find only scattered around the world in a thinner manner.
Hmm, hmm, so far so farm.
Yeah makes no sense that the highest level of blacksmithing, leatherworking and whatever can only take place there. I can understand if it can also take place there but trying to make such tiny country estates into something that can compete against counterparts of the same profession inside of a vastly renowned metropolis, just appears silly to me.
Oh boy I just hope that freeholds are not becoming a form of timesink or cheap "PvP reason" which will always just be resolved with higher numbers or something.
In Planetside 2, an 'FPS MMO' you can build tiny bases sometimes in between the innitial bases in the zones on the map. But it means nothing.
The balancing is non-existent and the faction with the most players on the server can pretty much dominate everywhere they want.
Given of course they all focus on the same front or continent.
Now I'm thinking that people conquer or destroy an already taken freehold, hold it for the duration of reallife days needed to build their own "masterclass workshops", (if they could not conquer it without having to scorch everything to the ground), produce the goods they innitially wanted and then run off into the four winds, cause they can't be bothered to defend the freehold 24/7 or something.
Or a guild having 100 members and having to put 30 of them in two shifts each day on "guard duty" to be near the guilds freehold and then switch in different timewindows, to make sure it isn't raided or conquered.
And then it all breaks down if player stop playing. xD
Such stuff always sound epic in theory but in praxis it is always the most unimpressive reasons why a guild or group of players dominates an area or why not.
The freeholds are part of the larger economy. They will have the best return, the fastest processing time, and will be able to do the highest level of processing. No other place will have that. It will be used as a means to control the economy. In the wiki, Freeholds are only vulnerable after the node falls for a set period. So if nodes can only be attacked in the server prime time, the freeholds are only vulnerable for an hour after the node falls. Don't quote me on the exact amount of time, that is just the number sticking in my head.
Freeholds make more caravans since you have to get the resources to the freehold and from the freehold. They will help support more PVP since they are limited. Conflict is good in games or else the game will stagnate and no one will want to cause any ripples. Peace will cause the player base to lose interest. There is the other side that also needs to be address. Constant war will also fatigue the player base and cause them to leave for a time to recover.
In the vision of AoC, Instanced freeholds would only work if they are 1) limited in number 2) have a risk for materials brought in and leaving 3) can be forciably made to change hands because of node loss and 4) can be pillaged once a node falls. Once those are in place, its no different than the plots they have in the game that are not instance. Instanced might even make it worse.
If you were to make them instanced, like Islands in Albion, the whole game will need to be redesigned. Economy, nodes, conflict, caravans, artisan classes and skills, the whole thing or it falls apart.
the government doesnt always do things right duh.
it makes perfect sense that players otuside the city could be better at something. also, the best crafting stations will be in the city anyways, accessible by anyone. only the best processing will be done in freehold. you could literally farm something and sell it, buy the highest tier processed materials, then go to the city and craft the best gear yourself.
if you are a casual and all you care about is farming tomatoes, then you can still farm your tomatoes. you will just be farming t3 tomatoes instead of t5.
remember the 50k account limit per server (eventually). 40k casuals login in 2 hours a week, and more dedicated players login in every day...
fixed it for you xd
Yep, indeed. But, there we go
Thanks
The facts are people are complaining about a system that hasn't even been tested yet because of {insert fear of some sweat lord/rmt/large guilds}. The goal of Ashes is to be immersive, instanced group based freeholds are the antithesis of that.
To me, seeing people want a safe space in a no safe space game is like me going to palia and asking for full loot, always on pvp. It makes zero sense.
If people are going on the forums to get the core value of a game changed instead of playing a "relevant game" that already appeals to a casual audience, then perhaps that game isn't as relevant as they're implying.
I really dont think that Ashes is a no safe space game. If that worst that happens in most instances is you lose some XP and gathering materials, thats not really a set back. Ashes is really more of a middle of the road you can always be in PvP and you might be inconvienced, but you arent losing all of your gear and everything on you. You arent losing entire levels. You might not get to finish the dungeon, but you still have all the stuff you started with.
he means no safe space from pvp. you can also lose things. you can lose your freehold, your city, the loot you had inside your city, the loot you had in your caravan, etc.
yeah exactly. i get it, ashes has lots of things that attract non pure (open world) pvp players, but come on, stop!! we dont go to pve games asking for pvp. look at nw, the carebears who only play 1 hour a week cried for change, ags gave it to them, then they left the game anyways....
Let's say he achieves the target of hyping 1 000 000 players at launch.
They level up and at max level they see the resource scarcity and start leaving.
Steven will have to decide to merge servers or not, to create scarcity again.
If Steven will merge the servers where players were getting freeholds comfortably because competition was low, they'll be upset and leave faster.
Merging servers is like nerfing the currency value because the price of a freehold will increase.
What will Steven do when he sees that merging servers drives players away?