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.

Entitled Solo-Players Whiners will Ruin this game.

2

Comments

  • BlackBronyBlackBrony Member, Alpha Two
    Marcet wrote: »
    BlackBrony wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    BlackBrony wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    That's the point. If everything is for coordinated group of people there's nothing left. Husbandry, inns, all gone for casuals that don't have a strong guild. Static housing, gone.

    You guys talk like this is the only thing in the game. I hope it's not just a housing simulator, right...??

    You can't beat dungeons solo, you can't beat bosses solo, you can't invade a node solo, but when they tell you that you can't own physical space in the server just for you and yourself, you guys go crazy.

    Dungeons? Are you telling me that guilds won't control them, ask for money to enter or forbid entrance? Bosses, you mean world bosses? A casual or small guild don't stand a chance for that.
    Even farming mats. Hardcore guilds already have designated farmers, you think some casuals farming gonna make them rich?
    What is the "exclusivity" in farming? None. Everyone can farm, therefore it holds no value compared to processing mats, which requires a freehold.

    Then there is no hope!! abandon ship!!!

    It is still a valid point. But you cannot provide reasons why is not
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member, Alpha Two
    Neurath wrote: »
    Wiki states Freeholds will be ample. This is no longer the case.

    low thousands in ample imo. low thousands is more than enough to do what there designed to do, more than that would diminish there value making them not worth the risk to own them.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Veeshan wrote: »
    Neurath wrote: »
    Wiki states Freeholds will be ample. This is no longer the case.

    low thousands in ample imo. low thousands is more than enough to do what there designed to do, more than that would diminish there value making them not worth the risk to own them.

    There is no risk to owning them. I don't know why you've put them on a pedestal. You can replace a lost freehold, do a quest to keep the freehold in a zoi switch with t3 or above. You can mitigate the risk of loss. You can ignore a siege and just let a freehold fall. The only people who see the risk are those who lack the competence to get more.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    MageC wrote: »
    Not the best at typing. German guy here.

    I have been following the game ever since Kickstarter. First-time I feel the urge to actually make a thread forum post. What is up with all this whining about freeholds?! This is not Barbie MMO why am I having a Déjà vu with NEW WORLD ALPHA forums when all the same solo-player whing crybabies showed up and started asking to removal of PVP to Teleportation to easy questing and all the same crap that ended up killing the game?!

    Happening all over again Intrepid better just ignore this people they want easy best house in the game playing SOLO?! what the actual f...... If I was Stephen I would just block all the accounts. They are the same that will leave the game after 3 months when League of Legends MMO comes out. We don't need them we need dedicate players. Ignore them. Everyone in guild is happy.

    No more than Zerglords, at least.

    As long as Intrepid remembers the average player will not be in massive guilds like some of the thousand man zergs / corpos that'll be playing this game we'll be ok.

  • BlackBronyBlackBrony Member, Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    MageC wrote: »
    Not the best at typing. German guy here.

    I have been following the game ever since Kickstarter. First-time I feel the urge to actually make a thread forum post. What is up with all this whining about freeholds?! This is not Barbie MMO why am I having a Déjà vu with NEW WORLD ALPHA forums when all the same solo-player whing crybabies showed up and started asking to removal of PVP to Teleportation to easy questing and all the same crap that ended up killing the game?!

    Happening all over again Intrepid better just ignore this people they want easy best house in the game playing SOLO?! what the actual f...... If I was Stephen I would just block all the accounts. They are the same that will leave the game after 3 months when League of Legends MMO comes out. We don't need them we need dedicate players. Ignore them. Everyone in guild is happy.

    No more than Zerglords, at least.

    As long as Intrepid remembers the average player will not be in massive guilds like some of the thousand man zergs / corpos that'll be playing this game we'll be ok.

    Are you insane? The average player WILL be in a zer guild! The best place to hide. Doesn't matter if you perform or not, because your performance is averaged.
    There's a reason why you have "elite squads", which are the few, and then the army, which is basically everyone else.
    Avarege player will be a npc in a large guild, get access to goodies and contribute some gold. It's the only logical solution.
  • iccericcer Member
    edited July 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.


    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.


    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).


    100% spot on, and even though I agree with most of the stuff you say about Freeholds, this one takes the cake.

    Instead of just gating the freeholds so hard, have "smaller level" Freeholds that maybe don't offer as much stuff (like top tier processing, businesses, size etc.). At least this way, every player that sets their goal to own a freehold can actually do so. And if they like it, then they can work towards owning a real big freehold like showcased, where you get a bunch of perks for owning it, like top tier processing, businesses, etc.


    inb4 "I've yet to see a good point against the current system" blah blah blah.


    Also I like the more natural way of getting into a guild. You play the game, experience the content, find players who also do the same content as you, you create a guild together, or you join their guild, then you do more stuff together.
    Rather than guilds that just create the whole structure before the game even comes out, where they plan out everything to be as efficient as possible or whatever.

  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    BlackBrony wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    MageC wrote: »
    Not the best at typing. German guy here.

    I have been following the game ever since Kickstarter. First-time I feel the urge to actually make a thread forum post. What is up with all this whining about freeholds?! This is not Barbie MMO why am I having a Déjà vu with NEW WORLD ALPHA forums when all the same solo-player whing crybabies showed up and started asking to removal of PVP to Teleportation to easy questing and all the same crap that ended up killing the game?!

    Happening all over again Intrepid better just ignore this people they want easy best house in the game playing SOLO?! what the actual f...... If I was Stephen I would just block all the accounts. They are the same that will leave the game after 3 months when League of Legends MMO comes out. We don't need them we need dedicate players. Ignore them. Everyone in guild is happy.

    No more than Zerglords, at least.

    As long as Intrepid remembers the average player will not be in massive guilds like some of the thousand man zergs / corpos that'll be playing this game we'll be ok.

    Are you insane? The average player WILL be in a zer guild! The best place to hide. Doesn't matter if you perform or not, because your performance is averaged.
    There's a reason why you have "elite squads", which are the few, and then the army, which is basically everyone else.
    Avarege player will be a npc in a large guild, get access to goodies and contribute some gold. It's the only logical solution.

    They wont even bother playing.

    The Ninefive gamer wont touch Ashes if it's doesn't respect their time.





  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    and people complain about group finder in wow, and its a solo friendly option xDD
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

  • iccericcer Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

    I might've missed it, but where did they say it should be "easily" available?

    All types of content should be available to all players, with varying degrees of difficulty to reach it.
    That doesn't mean ALL content should be easily available to everyone.
    You have raids, some are easier, and some are only for elite players. So raid access should be available for everyone, but not every raid will be available to every single player.

    It's similar with Freeholds. If they put enough effort, all players should own a piece of land in the open-world, where they can plant stuff, farm animals, etc.
    Then for the elite players (or guilds in this case), you have Freeholds as the currently are, which are large plots of land, where you can do all of that + more, with businesses, highest tier processing, etc.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I don't understand why so many people equate solo with anti-social.
    Most players who solo MMORPGs have friends who are playing - and are likely in a guild.
    They just prefer adventuring while not in a formal group/party.

    You can expect solo players to have access to their friends' Freeholds.
    And you can expect solo players to own Freeholds that they share with friends.

    I'm not aware of a restriction that limits owning Freeholds to people in a guild.
  • Swifty00Swifty00 Member
    edited July 2023
    Xeeg wrote: »
    I think the node/citizenship system might already accomplish this, where it might be easier to trade/play with people that are in the same node as you, regardless of guilds. Maybe being in a guild is mandatory for like 1/5th of end game content, but the other 4/5 you can get just by playing with people you meet in the game.

    This and I am not even sure about the 1/5th.
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    iccer wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

    I might've missed it, but where did they say it should be "easily" available?

    All types of content should be available to all players, with varying degrees of difficulty to reach it.
    That doesn't mean ALL content should be easily available to everyone.
    You have raids, some are easier, and some are only for elite players. So raid access should be available for everyone, but not every raid will be available to every single player.

    It's similar with Freeholds. If they put enough effort, all players should own a piece of land in the open-world, where they can plant stuff, farm animals, etc.
    Then for the elite players (or guilds in this case), you have Freeholds as the currently are, which are large plots of land, where you can do all of that + more, with businesses, highest tier processing, etc.

    A solo player could save up and buy a freehold as they currently are. Even if I decide to agree that it's impossible, I don't think all content types should be available to all players. As I said, I think there should be content for all players but that doesn't mean they need access to all content types.

    As a side note, I really think players need to play it as it's hard to understand how the system will feel. I think people are overestimating how much guilds will value these as well as how the system will feel when you factor in that people will be sharing them.
  • iccericcer Member
    edited July 2023
    iccer wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

    I might've missed it, but where did they say it should be "easily" available?

    All types of content should be available to all players, with varying degrees of difficulty to reach it.
    That doesn't mean ALL content should be easily available to everyone.
    You have raids, some are easier, and some are only for elite players. So raid access should be available for everyone, but not every raid will be available to every single player.

    It's similar with Freeholds. If they put enough effort, all players should own a piece of land in the open-world, where they can plant stuff, farm animals, etc.
    Then for the elite players (or guilds in this case), you have Freeholds as the currently are, which are large plots of land, where you can do all of that + more, with businesses, highest tier processing, etc.

    A solo player could save up and buy a freehold as they currently are. Even if I decide to agree that it's impossible, I don't think all content types should be available to all players. As I said, I think there should be content for all players but that doesn't mean they need access to all content types.

    Well, that's ultimately what we disagree about then. If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment. In Ashes, that doesn't look like it will be the case, when talking about Freeholds. Because you rely on whether others own a Freehold or not, there's limited space, and simply put, more than 50% of the playerbase won't be able to own a Freehold at any given moment.

    I don't expect to own the best armor around, but I will still own some good armor. I don't expect to own the best flying mount, but I do expect to own some sort of a mount. You get the deal.

    With Freeholds, you either own them, or you don't. There isn't a more "shitty" version of Freeholds. In-node housing could be that, but as it stands, it could be even harder to get. And I feel like all the concerns we have about Freeholds, will apply to in-node housing as well, again leaving regular players out of them.
    The only other housing type is instanced housing, but it just doesn't compare to Freeholds. The only common thing they have is that they're both types of housing.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    @iccer
    If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment.

    By your logic because you can do everything without having a freehold that isn't crafting the most high end stuff they already service you like that.

    Anything you need or want to obtain or types of content can be done without a freehold, but to get the best it requires a different degree of time and effort.

    So you should have no issue if it is simply about having access to everything, and not about having access to the best thing.
  • iccericcer Member
    edited July 2023
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    @iccer
    If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment.

    By your logic because you can do everything without having a freehold that isn't crafting the most high end stuff they already service you like that.

    Anything you need or want to obtain or types of content can be done without a freehold, but to get the best it requires a different degree of time and effort.

    So you should have no issue if it is simply about having access to everything, and not about having access to the best thing.

    But is that the case? Am I gonna be able to own a stable and do animal husbandry on my own plot of land, somewhere out in the world?
    Am I gonna be able to plant and harvest stuff to then use for crafting or to sell for profit, on my own plot of land, somewhere out in the world?


    You're thinking about solely what services the Freehold offers, but what about the type of gameplay it offers? What about just going out in the world, exploring, killing stuff, maybe gathering, then coming to your house/farm, depositing stuff, planting stuff on your farm, managing animals (harvesting resources from them), breeding stuff if you want to? I very much doubt that will be available without a Freehold.

    Nowhere has Steven explicitly said you could do farming, animal husbandry, etc. without a Freehold. It's all just vague confusing words, and please don't bring that discord screenshot again, because it says nothing.
    Dygz wrote: »
    I don't understand why so many people equate solo with anti-social.
    Most players who solo MMORPGs have friends who are playing - and are likely in a guild.
    They just prefer adventuring while not in a formal group/party.


    You can expect solo players to have access to their friends' Freeholds.
    And you can expect solo players to own Freeholds that they share with friends.

    I'm not aware of a restriction that limits owning Freeholds to people in a guild.

    Oh I absolutely agree with the first part.

    You can expect a tiny, tiny % of "solo" players to own a Freehold, sure. But again, large majority of the playerbase won't own one. One, because there are only a certain number of Freeholds available, meaning it's inevitable players will be left out. It's in low thousands, when they expect the servers to go up to 50k players with 10k concurrent players. That's 87.5% players playing the game at any given moment that don't have a Freehold. And it's 2% out of whole server population that will own one.


    It absolutely shouldn't be equated to getting legendary gear or top tier mount (in terms of percentage of people owning them), because they're simply not the same.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    iccer wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    @iccer
    If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment.

    By your logic because you can do everything without having a freehold that isn't crafting the most high end stuff they already service you like that.

    Anything you need or want to obtain or types of content can be done without a freehold, but to get the best it requires a different degree of time and effort.

    So you should have no issue if it is simply about having access to everything, and not about having access to the best thing.

    But is that the case? Am I gonna be able to own a stable and do animal husbandry on my own plot of land, somewhere out in the world?
    Am I gonna be able to plant and harvest stuff to then use for crafting or to sell for profit, on my own plot of land, somewhere out in the world?


    You're thinking about solely what services the Freehold offers, but what about the type of gameplay it offers? What about just going out in the world, exploring, killing stuff, maybe gathering, then coming to your house/farm, depositing stuff, planting stuff on your farm, managing animals (harvesting resources from them), breeding stuff if you want to? I very much doubt that will be available without a Freehold.

    Nowhere has Steven explicitly said you could do farming, animal husbandry, etc. without a Freehold. It's all just vague confusing words, and please don't bring that discord screenshot again, because it says nothing.
    Dygz wrote: »
    I don't understand why so many people equate solo with anti-social.
    Most players who solo MMORPGs have friends who are playing - and are likely in a guild.
    They just prefer adventuring while not in a formal group/party.


    You can expect solo players to have access to their friends' Freeholds.
    And you can expect solo players to own Freeholds that they share with friends.

    I'm not aware of a restriction that limits owning Freeholds to people in a guild.

    Oh I absolutely agree with the first part.

    You can expect a tiny, tiny % of "solo" players to own a Freehold, sure. But again, large majority of the playerbase won't own one. One, because there are only a certain number of Freeholds available, meaning it's inevitable players will be left out. It's in low thousands, when they expect the servers to go up to 50k players with 10k concurrent players. That's 87.5% players playing the game at any given moment that don't have a Freehold. And it's 2% out of whole server population that will own one.


    It absolutely shouldn't be equated to getting legendary gear or top tier mount (in terms of percentage of people owning them), because they're simply not the same.

    You aren't going to own land that is tied to freeholds, housing wise you will have an apartment or non instanced house. You should be able to do farming as well as animal husbandry, though of course not to the same level as a freehold.

    If you can't do farming or animal husbandry than people are free to complain since that would be feel like you are cut off from content.

    You can kill stuff and come back to your home, that is going to be a major gameplay cycle to put the stuff you found or gathered safely away. But owning land is for players that are competitive enough to work towards that, as well as able to defend it.

    I agree he hasn't said it, but there are a lot of things not said, and we will learn more as we get closer to alpha 2. Regardless they are looking for feedback so complains are still valid, and concerns of being locked out of content if you are unable to do it anywhere else in lower tiers.

  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    To add bdo allowed you to have a tiny plot you could place to grow and breed plants and animals. It is something AoC could do as well.

    And for animal husbandry that could be a node thing where you got o the stable and do the interface there and see what you have.
  • iccericcer Member
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    iccer wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    @iccer
    If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment.

    By your logic because you can do everything without having a freehold that isn't crafting the most high end stuff they already service you like that.

    Anything you need or want to obtain or types of content can be done without a freehold, but to get the best it requires a different degree of time and effort.

    So you should have no issue if it is simply about having access to everything, and not about having access to the best thing.

    But is that the case? Am I gonna be able to own a stable and do animal husbandry on my own plot of land, somewhere out in the world?
    Am I gonna be able to plant and harvest stuff to then use for crafting or to sell for profit, on my own plot of land, somewhere out in the world?


    You're thinking about solely what services the Freehold offers, but what about the type of gameplay it offers? What about just going out in the world, exploring, killing stuff, maybe gathering, then coming to your house/farm, depositing stuff, planting stuff on your farm, managing animals (harvesting resources from them), breeding stuff if you want to? I very much doubt that will be available without a Freehold.

    Nowhere has Steven explicitly said you could do farming, animal husbandry, etc. without a Freehold. It's all just vague confusing words, and please don't bring that discord screenshot again, because it says nothing.
    Dygz wrote: »
    I don't understand why so many people equate solo with anti-social.
    Most players who solo MMORPGs have friends who are playing - and are likely in a guild.
    They just prefer adventuring while not in a formal group/party.


    You can expect solo players to have access to their friends' Freeholds.
    And you can expect solo players to own Freeholds that they share with friends.

    I'm not aware of a restriction that limits owning Freeholds to people in a guild.

    Oh I absolutely agree with the first part.

    You can expect a tiny, tiny % of "solo" players to own a Freehold, sure. But again, large majority of the playerbase won't own one. One, because there are only a certain number of Freeholds available, meaning it's inevitable players will be left out. It's in low thousands, when they expect the servers to go up to 50k players with 10k concurrent players. That's 87.5% players playing the game at any given moment that don't have a Freehold. And it's 2% out of whole server population that will own one.


    It absolutely shouldn't be equated to getting legendary gear or top tier mount (in terms of percentage of people owning them), because they're simply not the same.

    You aren't going to own land that is tied to freeholds, housing wise you will have an apartment or non instanced house. You should be able to do farming as well as animal husbandry, though of course not to the same level as a freehold.

    If you can't do farming or animal husbandry than people are free to complain since that would be feel like you are cut off from content.

    You can kill stuff and come back to your home, that is going to be a major gameplay cycle to put the stuff you found or gathered safely away. But owning land is for players that are competitive enough to work towards that, as well as able to defend it.

    I agree he hasn't said it, but there are a lot of things not said, and we will learn more as we get closer to alpha 2. Regardless they are looking for feedback so complains are still valid, and concerns of being locked out of content if you are unable to do it anywhere else in lower tiers.
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    To add bdo allowed you to have a tiny plot you could place to grow and breed plants and animals. It is something AoC could do as well.

    And for animal husbandry that could be a node thing where you got o the stable and do the interface there and see what you have.

    Yup, it remains to be seen, we're still some time away from Alpha 2. It's why we are providing them with feedback, so they can hopefully adjust things if necessary.

    It's also the problem of open-development, because you might not get the full picture if they don't explicitly confirm something.

  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    As much as freeholds are likely to change, the same as nodes, it might not be possible or feasible for a casual player to buy a freehold. We won't know until we see pricing and what the economy is like.

    But if it takes me 6 months to save enough gold and resources to buy one but they are turning over on average every 3 months, the math doesn't add up.
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    iccer wrote: »
    iccer wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

    I might've missed it, but where did they say it should be "easily" available?

    All types of content should be available to all players, with varying degrees of difficulty to reach it.
    That doesn't mean ALL content should be easily available to everyone.
    You have raids, some are easier, and some are only for elite players. So raid access should be available for everyone, but not every raid will be available to every single player.

    It's similar with Freeholds. If they put enough effort, all players should own a piece of land in the open-world, where they can plant stuff, farm animals, etc.
    Then for the elite players (or guilds in this case), you have Freeholds as the currently are, which are large plots of land, where you can do all of that + more, with businesses, highest tier processing, etc.

    A solo player could save up and buy a freehold as they currently are. Even if I decide to agree that it's impossible, I don't think all content types should be available to all players. As I said, I think there should be content for all players but that doesn't mean they need access to all content types.

    Well, that's ultimately what we disagree about then. If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment. In Ashes, that doesn't look like it will be the case, when talking about Freeholds. Because you rely on whether others own a Freehold or not, there's limited space, and simply put, more than 50% of the playerbase won't be able to own a Freehold at any given moment.

    I don't expect to own the best armor around, but I will still own some good armor. I don't expect to own the best flying mount, but I do expect to own some sort of a mount. You get the deal.

    With Freeholds, you either own them, or you don't. There isn't a more "shitty" version of Freeholds. In-node housing could be that, but as it stands, it could be even harder to get. And I feel like all the concerns we have about Freeholds, will apply to in-node housing as well, again leaving regular players out of them.
    The only other housing type is instanced housing, but it just doesn't compare to Freeholds. The only common thing they have is that they're both types of housing.

    thats why steven has made very clear that not everybody will have everything. now let me ask you this. if you are paying for wow or ff, do you have access to everything all the time? are you able to do a dungeon or kill a boss all by yourself? no right? you need other players. you depend on other players.

    the difference is those games are cooperative and ashes is cooperative-competitive, but the basis of not having access to everything any time you want doesnt stand. you still need other players.

    even in ashes, there are other things that people wont be able to get. flying mounts, castles, rare gatherable resources. why arent you complaining about that? you are only complaining about fh maybe because thats the part of the game that interests you?
  • iccericcer Member
    Depraved wrote: »
    iccer wrote: »
    iccer wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

    I might've missed it, but where did they say it should be "easily" available?

    All types of content should be available to all players, with varying degrees of difficulty to reach it.
    That doesn't mean ALL content should be easily available to everyone.
    You have raids, some are easier, and some are only for elite players. So raid access should be available for everyone, but not every raid will be available to every single player.

    It's similar with Freeholds. If they put enough effort, all players should own a piece of land in the open-world, where they can plant stuff, farm animals, etc.
    Then for the elite players (or guilds in this case), you have Freeholds as the currently are, which are large plots of land, where you can do all of that + more, with businesses, highest tier processing, etc.

    A solo player could save up and buy a freehold as they currently are. Even if I decide to agree that it's impossible, I don't think all content types should be available to all players. As I said, I think there should be content for all players but that doesn't mean they need access to all content types.

    Well, that's ultimately what we disagree about then. If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment. In Ashes, that doesn't look like it will be the case, when talking about Freeholds. Because you rely on whether others own a Freehold or not, there's limited space, and simply put, more than 50% of the playerbase won't be able to own a Freehold at any given moment.

    I don't expect to own the best armor around, but I will still own some good armor. I don't expect to own the best flying mount, but I do expect to own some sort of a mount. You get the deal.

    With Freeholds, you either own them, or you don't. There isn't a more "shitty" version of Freeholds. In-node housing could be that, but as it stands, it could be even harder to get. And I feel like all the concerns we have about Freeholds, will apply to in-node housing as well, again leaving regular players out of them.
    The only other housing type is instanced housing, but it just doesn't compare to Freeholds. The only common thing they have is that they're both types of housing.

    thats why steven has made very clear that not everybody will have everything. now let me ask you this. if you are paying for wow or ff, do you have access to everything all the time? are you able to do a dungeon or kill a boss all by yourself? no right? you need other players. you depend on other players.

    the difference is those games are cooperative and ashes is cooperative-competitive, but the basis of not having access to everything any time you want doesnt stand. you still need other players.

    even in ashes, there are other things that people wont be able to get. flying mounts, castles, rare gatherable resources. why arent you complaining about that? you are only complaining about fh maybe because thats the part of the game that interests you?

    Please read again everything I said.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    @iccer Yup this is why i say most consumers can't handle open development. You get fragmented information as well as people getting attached to things from a game that does not exist yet.

    If we look at Anthem as an example they had removed flying in the game at one point. If people knew that they would be mad as if they felt it was a item / feature they owned personally. A lot of things goes on behind the scenes and things change, but people have a hard time seeing the change, even more so when they don't understand why or do not know the full picture.

    People always reference the wiki and its good to keep track of things, but there has to be a understanding things change (as they have been).
  • devmagedevmage Member, Alpha Two
    As a non-entitled mostly solo player these days I kinda hope for an experience that both respects my time but also where game play dictates encourages cooperation and grouping. I want to get in a guild right away and try to participate in all the game has to offer and not fall into my usual solo mentality.

    I've played MMO's since the Everquest days and was always social up to a point in WoW. Usually small/medium sized family like guilds doing content together. As WoW started loosing popularity my guild members left and I was by myself mostly. WoW over the years had made it super easy to just play never knowing anyone and that ended up being how I played. Then when I went onto other MMOs more less they did the same thing so I just play on my own in those too.

    I think you have a balance that works out well for everyone if you want to take the time to figure it out. I feel like the Ashes of Creation team does.
    ltg4tuxq2mzf.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    The game should be trying to push them to work with others.

    I agree, that is essentially what the post was about.

    However, you dont push people to work together by saying "you cant do this activity at all until you work well with others". You need to give people a smaller taste of the activity and then let them know that getting more of it requires working with others.

    If I am playing the game, leveling up, exploring etc, how will I know I enjoy the content that comes with a freehold?

    Until I get one, I wont.

    As such, why would freeholds be a reason for me to go out seeking to work with others?

    The short answer is, it wont.
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    The game should be trying to push them to work with others.

    I agree, that is essentially what the post was about.

    However, you dont push people to work together by saying "you cant do this activity at all until you work well with others". You need to give people a smaller taste of the activity and then let them know that getting more of it requires working with others.

    If I am playing the game, leveling up, exploring etc, how will I know I enjoy the content that comes with a freehold?

    Until I get one, I wont.

    As such, why would freeholds be a reason for me to go out seeking to work with others?

    The short answer is, it wont.

    People haven't even played the game and seem to be freaking out about the fact they might not be able to get a freehold so it doesn't seem like they need to do any activities related to freeholds to want one.

    Most activities you can do on a freehold you can do off of one, like gathering, processing and crafting. I don't think it would be hard for people who do those to see the advantages of a freehold.

    If they don't know if they would enjoy a freehold and don't get one, I don't see that as a problem. More freeholds for the people who figure out they want one.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    The game should be trying to push them to work with others.

    I agree, that is essentially what the post was about.

    However, you dont push people to work together by saying "you cant do this activity at all until you work well with others". You need to give people a smaller taste of the activity and then let them know that getting more of it requires working with others.

    If I am playing the game, leveling up, exploring etc, how will I know I enjoy the content that comes with a freehold?

    Until I get one, I wont.

    As such, why would freeholds be a reason for me to go out seeking to work with others?

    The short answer is, it wont.

    People haven't even played the game and seem to be freaking out about the fact they might not be able to get a freehold so it doesn't seem like they need to do any activities related to freeholds to want one.
    I mean, if I were playing with my guild, I doubt any solo player within a four node radius would be able to get a freehold.

    We would grab every one of them up that we could.

    The reason people know this is how it will work has little to do with the system, and everything to do with people.

    In order for the system to work, it needs to be effective enough to divert human nature.

    The current system just isnt.

  • VyrilVyril Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    iccer wrote: »
    iccer wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Marcet wrote: »
    If you like to play alone, like a lot of us want, you can't expect to reach goals as high as a coordinated group of people. You just can't be that entitled.

    If this was the case, nobody would need to work together and the game would be a boring solo-simulator, people would begin to isolate themselves more and more until the game is dead. Some things are cool because you won't have it. The value is so high. The game is more deep.

    In some respects you are right here, but in a way where you are totally missing the mark.

    Look at a game like WoW, EQ or EQ2. People come to the game by themselves - especially when these games first came out.

    They would play the game by themselves, discover groups and then get in to that, perhaps get a guild, and then maybe move on to raiding.

    The key thing is, the reason they did all of this is because the base level of the game kept them playing said game by themselves.

    To translate this to Ashes - imagine if there was a smaller, half acre freehold that a solo player was reasonably able to expect to get hold of. It can still be some work, but it is perfectly reasonable for them to assume that if they put a set amount of effort in, they will get one.

    So, thye have a freehold, and they enjoy the gameplay that comes with it. Perhaps they want more of that same gameplay, but their small freehold is fully used.

    The only way they can get more of that gameplay is to get together with other people and work towards it.

    This is absolutely key for every aspect of an MMO. You NEED to have all content types available to essentially all players - but you are able to limit how much of that they have access to without working together with others. Then, if people decide they want more of that content, they know what they have to do to get it.

    It is absolutely, 100% true that a solo player should not be able to achieve the same things as a guild. Absolutely true.

    However, there also should be no content types that a guild has access to that a solo player doesn't also have access to. It is the level of that content that needs to change, not access to that content.

    Freeholds are a content type.

    Thus, the issue is that there is only one level of freehold. No matter what Intrepid do, as long as only one level of freehold exists, it will not work - either they make it limited as it seems to be now and solo or casual players miss out on a content type, or they make it more accessable to all in which case guilds and the more organized don't have a means to take it to the next level (though an argument could be made for upgrading buildings).

    I disagree with the idea that all content types should be easily available to solo players. There should always be content for them to do but I think it's fine if some things are a little trickier for them to achieve solo. The game should be trying to push them to work with others. Working with others takes effort so it should be baited with something that's tasty.

    Solo players can come to the game, explore, level up their character, join social organizations/religions, and help develop nodes. There should be plenty for them to do that doesn't require access to a freehold.

    I might've missed it, but where did they say it should be "easily" available?

    All types of content should be available to all players, with varying degrees of difficulty to reach it.
    That doesn't mean ALL content should be easily available to everyone.
    You have raids, some are easier, and some are only for elite players. So raid access should be available for everyone, but not every raid will be available to every single player.

    It's similar with Freeholds. If they put enough effort, all players should own a piece of land in the open-world, where they can plant stuff, farm animals, etc.
    Then for the elite players (or guilds in this case), you have Freeholds as the currently are, which are large plots of land, where you can do all of that + more, with businesses, highest tier processing, etc.

    A solo player could save up and buy a freehold as they currently are. Even if I decide to agree that it's impossible, I don't think all content types should be available to all players. As I said, I think there should be content for all players but that doesn't mean they need access to all content types.

    Well, that's ultimately what we disagree about then. If I pay for the game, I expect to have access to every type of content the game has to offer, again with various degree of time and effort investment. In Ashes, that doesn't look like it will be the case, when talking about Freeholds. Because you rely on whether others own a Freehold or not, there's limited space, and simply put, more than 50% of the playerbase won't be able to own a Freehold at any given moment.

    I don't expect to own the best armor around, but I will still own some good armor. I don't expect to own the best flying mount, but I do expect to own some sort of a mount. You get the deal.

    With Freeholds, you either own them, or you don't. There isn't a more "shitty" version of Freeholds. In-node housing could be that, but as it stands, it could be even harder to get. And I feel like all the concerns we have about Freeholds, will apply to in-node housing as well, again leaving regular players out of them.
    The only other housing type is instanced housing, but it just doesn't compare to Freeholds. The only common thing they have is that they're both types of housing.

    The "type" is housing. And all players do get access.

    Apartments and inns. You could consider me a "solo" player. Idgaf about freeholds, hence why I read about them on the wiki and never bought the freehold pack.
  • SongcallerSongcaller Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Inns are quite attractive, especially if we can get citizenship from an Inn room.
    2a3b8ichz0pd.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.