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.
Okay this is already the best argument if they are that heavily integrated into the economy.
Too much peace is boring maybe but too much hassle is annoying also.
Then lets pray that Intrepit can find the right balance.
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
I don't get why the Freehold Auctions would require more parameters than gold + Node reputation.
If gold ultimately is not useful for any of the high end things, it would raise the question why even waste time trying to accumulate it.
And the "there will RMT" argument only raises the question on a more general level: If we suspect that any tradeable resource in the game could become subject of RMT and those have to be stopped 100% - is there any other solution than to eliminate trading altogether?
IMO the thing Intrepid could do during the Alpha and Beta is hire professional cybersecurity experts and let them try to break the game to facilitate RMT of various kinds. Let their internal screening software collect data on how they facilitated these trades and mark these as bannable behavior for the security system to act on. Another way to limit / stop any of these transaction would be to disallow sharing personal data through any of Intrepids communication platforms. e.g. "Lord Ember" might know that "ShadyDude" has a few 1000 gold to sell, but ShadyDude has now way to relay any way of payment to Lord Ember, he could give him the gold, but he cannot get paid because he cant name the target of the payment.
To conclude this: I think there are a number of ways that Intrepid can avoid enabling but also punish people trying to break the rules of the game.
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
It will feel bad if resources will be harder and harder to harvest as players gradually leave the server.
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
It will feel bad if resources will be harder and harder to harvest as players gradually leave the server.
how will they be harder to harvest? they will still be there o.o
also, less players in a server, less supply sure, but also less demand
the whole server could even gear up faster lol
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
It will feel bad if resources will be harder and harder to harvest as players gradually leave the server.
how will they be harder to harvest? they will still be there o.o
also, less players in a server, less supply sure, but also less demand
the whole server could even gear up faster lol
TydinSol said "The resources to craft are only half available."
I was thinking to the currently pinned thread ...
How predictable do you like the spawn rate for general and rare mobs in open-world, dungeons, and raid settings?
Steven tries to create scarcity and seems to check what players expect and where the pain level is.
So it can happen that we may not see bosses often or if we see them they'll not always drop valuable resources.
200 raiders might end up working more and more as population drops, assuming they are the only ones controlling access to a certain end game raid.
So on a 25% populated server some players will get a freehold easier, assuming their number is constant to the map size, but might not process often resources.
After a server merge, they'll lose access to freeholds and might see more resources in the world.
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
It will feel bad if resources will be harder and harder to harvest as players gradually leave the server.
how will they be harder to harvest? they will still be there o.o
also, less players in a server, less supply sure, but also less demand
the whole server could even gear up faster lol
TydinSol said "The resources to craft are only half available."
I was thinking to the currently pinned thread ...
How predictable do you like the spawn rate for general and rare mobs in open-world, dungeons, and raid settings?
Steven tries to create scarcity and seems to check what players expect and where the pain level is.
So it can happen that we may not see bosses often or if we see them they'll not always drop valuable resources.
200 raiders might end up working more and more as population drops, assuming they are the only ones controlling access to a certain end game raid.
So on a 25% populated server some players will get a freehold easier, assuming their number is constant to the map size, but might not process often resources.
After a server merge, they'll lose access to freeholds and might see more resources in the world.
ill put it simple. theres 10,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds are scare.
in a low pop server, there are 1,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds arent scarce anymore and everybody has one.
this applies to gatherable resources as well as everything really.
Players go where they can get resources. Even to servers of other MMOs.
Giving players everything they want in the easiest manner is the fastest way to kill an MMO. If you have the gear, and have beat everything. If you own a freehold and are a mayor of a town, you personally own a guild castle and have a guild with maxed out tech tree, why play the game.
ill put it simple. theres 10,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds are scare.
in a low pop server, there are 1,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds arent scarce anymore and everybody has one.
this applies to gatherable resources as well as everything really.
But will there be 1000 freeholds. There is XP debt to be paid to keep the nodes up to level. There are taxes to be paid on freeholds. Less active people mean less means to do all of the above.
This all goes back to what I said originally. To put in instanced freeholds, the game would fundamentally have to be changed.
If Raven016 thinks this game is going to fail, they should not invest in it. They should sit back from the sidelines and eat popcorn and say I told you so.
However, if the game succeeds, Raven016 needs to accept that the player base must be ok with it.
Players go where they can get resources. Even to servers of other MMOs.
Giving players everything they want in the easiest manner is the fastest way to kill an MMO. If you have the gear, and have beat everything. If you own a freehold and are a mayor of a town, you personally own a guild castle and have a guild with maxed out tech tree, why play the game.
MMOs rise and fall. Predicting what players will do is the challenge.
The game is not for casuals. I think this is something you should already know.
The game only rewards efficiency and time investment. The more time you spend and the more efficient you are with it, the further you can go.
And you also need people. So solo players won't get nothing like people in guilds. This is also a given. It doesn't matter how much time you play, you won't get there, that's the idea.
Freeholds are something more for guilds and group play. And you will get one if you play with others, coordinate, etc.
Casuals will mostly be gatherers or crafters. Gather has no restrictions, except getting to the area, unless that area is filled with mobs, then you need party.
Crafters can craft in cities.
I think some of you are forgetting housing such as Freeholds aren’t permanent, they’re yours so as long as you can keep it.
There were the best shit get processed. They’re not where you do some pretty ESO housing decorating and are not at risk of losing it.
Some of you gotta realize how economically punishing Ashes is going to be and you haven’t figured it out yet.
You almost hit the mark, then you made the extremist view that freeholds won't be for decorating. Steven already has systems in place for what happens when your freehold is destroyed. They also wouldn't showcase multitudes of housing decor if they didn't expect you to decorate them.. you don't get a freehold expecting to lose it, you get one expecting to protect it with all your might.
Future Falconer, Top 1% PvPer and owner of Big and Beautiful Homesteads
I think some of you are forgetting housing such as Freeholds aren’t permanent, they’re yours so as long as you can keep it.
There were the best shit get processed. They’re not where you do some pretty ESO housing decorating and are not at risk of losing it.
Some of you gotta realize how economically punishing Ashes is going to be and you haven’t figured it out yet.
You almost hit the mark, then you made the extremist view that freeholds won't be for decorating. Steven already has systems in place for what happens when your freehold is destroyed. They also wouldn't showcase multitudes of housing decor if they didn't expect you to decorate them.. you don't get a freehold expecting to lose it, you get one expecting to protect it with all your might.
The reality of the matter is ESO housing is instanced and unable to be lost.
That’s not the case for Ashes, the casual housing enthusiast will not be keep their freehold from organized guilds. They will be losing it.
There’s nothing extreme about the reality of economically punishing styles of games. It’s the nature of them.
I would like to see something along the lines UO. Back then you could buy a castle for a large amount of gold (here a freehold). But then you had to find a place to put it, which was almost impossible. In AoC you sell the deed to anyone with the money, but they would have to complete a quest to place it in that region. Each region could have a different quest in which the difficulty was based on node size and type, and when a region is full the quest is no longer available. Even though buying the deed was the easy part, it felt so good, making progress towards that goal.
Players go where they can get resources. Even to servers of other MMOs.
Giving players everything they want in the easiest manner is the fastest way to kill an MMO. If you have the gear, and have beat everything. If you own a freehold and are a mayor of a town, you personally own a guild castle and have a guild with maxed out tech tree, why play the game.
ill put it simple. theres 10,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds are scare.
in a low pop server, there are 1,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds arent scarce anymore and everybody has one.
this applies to gatherable resources as well as everything really.
But will there be 1000 freeholds. There is XP debt to be paid to keep the nodes up to level. There are taxes to be paid on freeholds. Less active people mean less means to do all of the above.
This all goes back to what I said originally. To put in instanced freeholds, the game would fundamentally have to be changed.
If Raven016 thinks this game is going to fail, they should not invest in it. They should sit back from the sidelines and eat popcorn and say I told you so.
However, if the game succeeds, Raven016 needs to accept that the player base must be ok with it.
you dont need to xp in every node, and taxes wont change based on population...plus we dont know how expensive or cheap they will be. people will still buy your stuff btw because one person cant craft (process) everything in one freehold. most people will choose their citizenship in the t6 nodes anyways, low pop or high pop, you wont be the only one contributing to the node xp
There will be pressure onto Steven at release.
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?
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
The 1m players is not my assumption. The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6] https://youtu.be/rrD4RCTbxds?t=37m10s
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
@TydinSol You brought into the discussion the "Instanced freeholds". Why did you done that?
Comments
Okay this is already the best argument if they are that heavily integrated into the economy.
Too much peace is boring maybe but too much hassle is annoying also.
Then lets pray that Intrepit can find the right balance.
You are making a ton of assumptions based on your views. Also, if you ever listen to game designers about game theory, they frequently say that people don't really know or understand what they want. GGG or Path of exile develpers are very open about design and share the pitfalls of letting players push design too much.
If gold ultimately is not useful for any of the high end things, it would raise the question why even waste time trying to accumulate it.
And the "there will RMT" argument only raises the question on a more general level: If we suspect that any tradeable resource in the game could become subject of RMT and those have to be stopped 100% - is there any other solution than to eliminate trading altogether?
IMO the thing Intrepid could do during the Alpha and Beta is hire professional cybersecurity experts and let them try to break the game to facilitate RMT of various kinds. Let their internal screening software collect data on how they facilitated these trades and mark these as bannable behavior for the security system to act on. Another way to limit / stop any of these transaction would be to disallow sharing personal data through any of Intrepids communication platforms. e.g. "Lord Ember" might know that "ShadyDude" has a few 1000 gold to sell, but ShadyDude has now way to relay any way of payment to Lord Ember, he could give him the gold, but he cannot get paid because he cant name the target of the payment.
To conclude this: I think there are a number of ways that Intrepid can avoid enabling but also punish people trying to break the rules of the game.
The 1m players is not my assumption.
The developers are hoping for over a million concurrent users at launch.[6]
And the fact that on the release day / month many people rush to start playing is normal. And they'll stop playing for various reasons.
Servers will have to be merged eventually.
There are two options for player owned land and property depending on the difference in size of the two servers.[3]
For equal sized servers, property ownership will be reset for both servers, requiring all players to reestablish property ownership when the merge is complete.[3]
For merges into a stronger server, only the players coming from the weaker server will be required to establish property ownership following the merge.[3]
And players will not happy to lose freeholds and lower chance to get new ones.
You are again making assumptions that not everyone will be happy. If done correctly, it will be a good thing. Servers that are half filled have a half filled economy. The resources to craft are only half available. Merging servers will be a good thing. Having a freehold in a place that is sparsely populated is a bad thing. Merging servers will create a new dynamic.
Instanced freeholds will never be the answer in the current design of AoC. You will never be albe to sell it to the developers without also giving them a redesign of the whole system.
It will feel bad if resources will be harder and harder to harvest as players gradually leave the server.
how will they be harder to harvest? they will still be there o.o
also, less players in a server, less supply sure, but also less demand
the whole server could even gear up faster lol
TydinSol said "The resources to craft are only half available."
I was thinking to the currently pinned thread ... ... which is just an extension to the previous question
Steven tries to create scarcity and seems to check what players expect and where the pain level is.
So it can happen that we may not see bosses often or if we see them they'll not always drop valuable resources.
200 raiders might end up working more and more as population drops, assuming they are the only ones controlling access to a certain end game raid.
So on a 25% populated server some players will get a freehold easier, assuming their number is constant to the map size, but might not process often resources.
After a server merge, they'll lose access to freeholds and might see more resources in the world.
ill put it simple. theres 10,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds are scare.
in a low pop server, there are 1,000 players and 1,000 freeholds. freeholds arent scarce anymore and everybody has one.
this applies to gatherable resources as well as everything really.
they can also come to where they can get pvp and competition
Giving players everything they want in the easiest manner is the fastest way to kill an MMO. If you have the gear, and have beat everything. If you own a freehold and are a mayor of a town, you personally own a guild castle and have a guild with maxed out tech tree, why play the game.
But will there be 1000 freeholds. There is XP debt to be paid to keep the nodes up to level. There are taxes to be paid on freeholds. Less active people mean less means to do all of the above.
This all goes back to what I said originally. To put in instanced freeholds, the game would fundamentally have to be changed.
If Raven016 thinks this game is going to fail, they should not invest in it. They should sit back from the sidelines and eat popcorn and say I told you so.
However, if the game succeeds, Raven016 needs to accept that the player base must be ok with it.
MMOs rise and fall. Predicting what players will do is the challenge.
He will play Alpha 2 as much as he wants
The game only rewards efficiency and time investment. The more time you spend and the more efficient you are with it, the further you can go.
And you also need people. So solo players won't get nothing like people in guilds. This is also a given. It doesn't matter how much time you play, you won't get there, that's the idea.
Freeholds are something more for guilds and group play. And you will get one if you play with others, coordinate, etc.
Casuals will mostly be gatherers or crafters. Gather has no restrictions, except getting to the area, unless that area is filled with mobs, then you need party.
Crafters can craft in cities.
There were the best shit get processed. They’re not where you do some pretty ESO housing decorating and are not at risk of losing it.
Some of you gotta realize how economically punishing Ashes is going to be and you haven’t figured it out yet.
You almost hit the mark, then you made the extremist view that freeholds won't be for decorating. Steven already has systems in place for what happens when your freehold is destroyed. They also wouldn't showcase multitudes of housing decor if they didn't expect you to decorate them.. you don't get a freehold expecting to lose it, you get one expecting to protect it with all your might.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuU1txumPQ5PqdU1D9cPhIg
https://twitch.tv/trusivraj
The reality of the matter is ESO housing is instanced and unable to be lost.
That’s not the case for Ashes, the casual housing enthusiast will not be keep their freehold from organized guilds. They will be losing it.
There’s nothing extreme about the reality of economically punishing styles of games. It’s the nature of them.
you dont need to xp in every node, and taxes wont change based on population...plus we dont know how expensive or cheap they will be. people will still buy your stuff btw because one person cant craft (process) everything in one freehold. most people will choose their citizenship in the t6 nodes anyways, low pop or high pop, you wont be the only one contributing to the node xp
@TydinSol You brought into the discussion the "Instanced freeholds". Why did you done that?