Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
The freeholds are not for casuals. They are for guilds. Should they be for megaguilds or not?
George_Black
Member, Intrepid Pack
Enough with the casual farmiville QQ.
Freeholds are an important achievement.
Feeeholds should be family locked. Period. This will prevent 1000 member guilds from giving permission to 1000 people to work on the freehold.
Even the battalion permission idea will cause people to stop and think:
"Do I wanna be a nobody with nothing, amongst 1000 people? Or should I join a guild with 50-80 members and rotate batalion/family membership so that I am permitted to gain access to the 'guilds freeholds' ?" Fvck waiting for 1000 other members.
I think such restrictions will further empower meaningful, smaller communities and weaken the strong advantage that big guilds have, the sheer numbers power.
I think freeholds should allow permission to family members only to help small, strong guilds compete for them, whilst the big guilds enjoy the castles.
Freeholds are an important achievement.
Feeeholds should be family locked. Period. This will prevent 1000 member guilds from giving permission to 1000 people to work on the freehold.
Even the battalion permission idea will cause people to stop and think:
"Do I wanna be a nobody with nothing, amongst 1000 people? Or should I join a guild with 50-80 members and rotate batalion/family membership so that I am permitted to gain access to the 'guilds freeholds' ?" Fvck waiting for 1000 other members.
I think such restrictions will further empower meaningful, smaller communities and weaken the strong advantage that big guilds have, the sheer numbers power.
I think freeholds should allow permission to family members only to help small, strong guilds compete for them, whilst the big guilds enjoy the castles.
0
Comments
Either way I’m excited to hear more about guild perks and such. I would much rather be in a smaller guild. That 50-80 range, or even smaller like 25-40, and it’s exciting that they planned for that to have benefits.
Gimme all those perks.
While I am all for limiting the power of the large guilds who already have a lot of advantages in the game, they are comprised of families too. This won't stop them from wanting or getting freeholds.
Quite honestly, I would be perfectly happy with this. - but there still needs to be a second tier of land ownership in the game.
To be fair, for most of the discussion around freeholds, "guilds" is shorthand for large, well organized guilds, and "casual" is shorthand for everyone else.
Not for guilds but for dedicated players.
Hardcore freeholders should be able to defeat casual freeholders when competing to get one.
That means players who have dedication for working on a freehold should be able to finish the quest needed to show they are worth owning it.
If those players are solo or in guilds should not matter.
Quests to acquire a freehold should not be like "go show me you can milk 10 cows and give me 100000 gold"
Players should not be able to get help form guild members when showing how expertly and passionately they can milk the cows.
It all made sense once I saw who created the topic.
Didn't you just rake someone over the coals for asking if there would be Guildhalls for smaller guilds?
Now you want preferential treatment for smaller guilds in relation to Freeholds?
Do you think this will be good for the game long term?
it will be. we need people logging in and processing things on those freeholds 24/7. a freehold owned by someone who only plays 2-3 hours a week and logs in to farm tomatoes and barely does any processing isn't good for the game.
imagine if every fh was owned by a casual who barely did any processing...how will people get processed goods?
I honestly think that even if freeholds were the only housing option available, (as long as you could get citizenship without it ofc)
It would not be a problem for the long term whatsoever - housing is not that important this whole thing is just a storm in a teacup
most MMORPGs don't even have housing at all, WoW doesn't have any housing, and in MMOs with housing like BDO that has a decent system, most players still don't care
however... freeholds are Not the only type of housing available so, zero problems, the few players that do care about housing can have it in nodes - and those that put in the work eventually will get their freehold
as for processing... not an issue either, over 30% to 40% of a server will have access due to family/guild sharing, more than enough for 1 out of 3 profession branches.
If processing is the main purpose and function of freeholds, why is Intrepid spending so much time with things like skins, furniture, and businesses?
Does being a casual player mean that individual is automatically inefficient in their processing?
because cool things look cool. why not give them flavor? also, more money for the company.
and yes, being a casual means you are automatically inefficient at processing, at least in this game. steven has indicated that you need to tend to your processing stations. i think i explained that to you in another post.
so processing in ashes isn't going to be something like logging in, buying a bunch of raw mats at the auction house, clicking your processing stations and processing those mats instantly, putting them on the auction house then logging off for 3 days, rinse and repeat.
so how is better for the game if a casual owns fh instead of a hardcore player again?
inefficient? yes as by the definition of being casual you are spending less time setting up deals, farming, skilling up, gaining recipes, etc. If that doesn't make sense to you, explain how a casual could be efficient for processing from both a player and a customer perspective as there will be many who seek out high level processers for their ability.
As for the cosmetics, its to add more variability so that more people might be willing to seek out and accomplish themselves with a freehold. More styles = more people enticed to own one.
All the things you can do on a freehold are traditionally things many casual players love to do, so denying them that would be eminently stupid for the health of the game. Casuals join families and guilds too. The truly solo player is not very common.
And who cares if they don't run their freehold to full capacity? That's just more market share for the hardcore players.
Its a money / smart marketing thing. They plan to create a lot of content and these houses aren't extra resources to make but what they need in the world anyway. So people buying them actually can pay for the development cost on the artist making it.
IS is clearly the winner here and it is a very good strategy business wise. You can fairly say they were not clear about things but that is development in process they most likely didn't have a answer, in fact they were most likely were going to have far less (until world changes). But they were not shy about saying the difficulty to get it, that being linked to it not being instanced made it clear their availability would not be huge in terms most most people owning their own.
End of the day this is one of those things that isn't the best for consumers to be following so it won't be swallowed well (as seen clearly). If no eon knew anything about the game and AoC was released no one would be batting a eye or caring, they would get their houses and want to work towards getting a freehold and being excited if they managed to get one.
It's literally better for any and all hardcore players to have more FH in casuals' hands than in guilds'. And even if you represent a guild - it's more beneficial for you to have less competition.
Waaay back in the day I suggested a system of "casual currency" (pretty much just unplayed hours in an item form). The only way for "only casuals to own FHs" would be to implement that system and then only sell FHs for that currency. In any other situation hardcore players would be able to buy themselves a freehold and would then be better than the majority of other players.
There. is. not. enough. room. in. the. world.
Unless you want the servers to look like an official ark or rust server. because that is what you would get.
They certainly do look cool. Do you think decorating a housing structure or plot is more commonly associate with the PvP or PvE player base?
Are casual players not able or allowed to tend to their processing stations?
Do most casual players only log on every three days?
nothing you mentioned is being held back from someone who does not own a freehold so im not sure what you're trying to say.
Is that the definition of inefficient? This is the definition I found: Are casual players not able to communicate with others outside of the game? Are they allowed to log into the game only once per day? Are they not allowed to buy recipes?
Why are you defining inefficient when casual is what I was describing? You didn't even answer my questions.
You were equating the definition of casual to inefficient. I was just pointing out they are not the same thing. I am trying to understand the thought process of why we equate casual players to inefficiency and thus not contributing to the game world. I find the best way to understand another person's viewpoint is to ask them questions about it. Making assumptions is generally not always the best course.
A casual player could log in in the morning, harvest crops that are ready to be harvested, set their processing stations, remove goods that are complete. Then they go about their workday, occasionally checking in with the guild or clients through discord or some other means to see what they need. The casual player could use the web app to manage their freehold. They could hire farmhands and npcs to help run things. After work they can log in and repeat the same process. Some might even be able to pop in during lunch. On weekends most casual players to tend to have more time. So they can work a little extra hard or potentially use this time to get recipes and materials needed for the upcoming week.
You seem to think I am trying to start an argument with you. I am just trying to understand how you have come to your opinion. I agree with your statement on cosmetics.
If it does end up this easy of a gameplay (and I do agree that it kinda leans towards this being the case) - I'd find it even more baffling why Steven decided to completely fuck people over with freeholds. Removing casuals from the most casual-friendly content definitely seems like one hell of a decision.
Probably not, but I could be wrong. There are a lot of factors in the equation of balance between "no-lifers" and casuals, and this is just one of them.
Answer me this if you truly want to understand what I mean.
Does a casual player min-max their time, knowledge, and engagement with the game?
There. would. be. a. lot. more. room. if. they. didn't. triple. the. size. of. freeholds.
They could easily double or triple the numbers if they went with smaller and/or different tiers of freeholds. Hamlets would be great too, so it's less spread out.
Another thing is the lack of co-ownership. They want family based freeholds, but don't let the other family members co-own? So the one guy who owns it can just say, screw you guys, I am leaving the family with my freehold. Bye suckers!
It always fascinates me the way "hardcore" players look at 'casuals' like they're a plague on their game without realizing (or refusing to admit) that those sub paying casuals that just want to be left alone are why the game is able to stay afloat.
No casuals=no game. Steven isn't running a charity here, he will eventually run out of money or cut his losses if the game isn't turning a profit. It needs to be sustainable and if casuals are getting pooped on every time they turn around they will find another game and take their money with them.