Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.

Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Leveling Speed

17810121316

Comments

  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    edited October 7
    Or maybe they need to design a short game and long game into this. Short game to satisfy those who want and need immediate gratification and long game for those who really savor the journey.
    I doubt that Intrepid would actually do it, but as I suggested in another topic - this could be solved relatively easy by making OG Ashes of Creation have longer leveling and then adding servers with increased rates. Could be an elegant solution to satisfy everyone, but once again, I highly doubt Intrepid would do that
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Leveling speed is not a problem in this game.

    220ish hours for your main leveling path. There is so many side paths that people will be climbing like religion, race and so on. My guess and it is a guess. It will take average people well over a year to level what they need to make a well rounded char. Any MMO worth it's salt will have a new expansion out in that time frame. Matter of fact, IS should already be working on that expansion.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Slower is almost always better. I hate games where you get a cool new weapon and in less then a day you out level it and don't get to enjoy the item. Same with content I hate out leveling area's I did not get to experience on the way to max level.

    I agree that too slow is better than too fast - but that leaves open the question of what we are comparing that too slow or too fast against.

    As has been said, the point of leveling (and thus the measure against which you determin if a games leveling is too slow or too fast) is to teach players the game.

    Teaching the game should include the class in question, the games world as it relates to gameplay, and the game systems.

    If it would take an average gamer 10 hours to learn these systems, having the games leveling only take 8 hours would be bad. The game is better off making it take 12 hours instead. However, there are limits to this - the game above should't make it's leveling take 15 or more hours if it only takes 10 hours to learn what needs to be learned.

    That is where my concern is with Ashes. With an expected 200+ leveling time, that means the game realistically needs 125 or more hours worth of stuff for players to learn, and I really don't see it having that much to it.

    So, TL:DR, I agree that games should have their leveling experience be a little bit too long rather than a little bit too short, but it really shouldn't be excessively long.
  • FireplayFireplay Member, Alpha Two
    I love the idea of a slow grind. I want it to feel like an achievement when I hit max level. Cheesing your way to a quick level feels cheated
    kr9ltkpbhsee.png
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    edited October 8
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    Matter of fact, IS should already be working on that expansion.
    Excuse me, we have 5 nodes out of 100 at the moment and 6/8 archetypes, what "expansions" are you talking about?

    Expansions come with a speed that they are supposed to come with either rarely or never, depending on the game. While it's not that big of a deal for a box-cost game like New World, for example, it might be an issue for a subscription-based game like Ashes.
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    Matter of fact, IS should already be working on that expansion.
    Excuse me, we have 5 nodes out of 100 at the moment and 6/8 archetypes, what "expansions" are you talking about?

    Expansions come with a speed that they are supposed to come with either rarely or never, depending on the game. While it's not that big of a deal for a box-cost game like New World, for example, it might be an issue for a subscription-based game like Ashes.

    23 years of MMOing and the games that did well had an expansion on a yearly schedule. Listening to many interviews. About two years before launch these game developers were already working on an expansion. It's common practice.
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    23 years of MMOing and the games that did well had an expansion on a yearly schedule. Listening to many interviews. About two years before launch these game developers were already working on an expansion. It's common practice.
    I'd assume Intrepid could think about the ideas for future expansions in general, yeah, but the game itself is too far from being finished. And I would probably call it a miracle if we are "2 years before launch" at the moment. Not trying to be overly pessimistic, but things normally take more time than you expect them to take
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    23 years of MMOing and the games that did well had an expansion on a yearly schedule. Listening to many interviews. About two years before launch these game developers were already working on an expansion. It's common practice.
    I'd assume Intrepid could think about the ideas for future expansions in general, yeah, but the game itself is too far from being finished. And I would probably call it a miracle if we are "2 years before launch" at the moment. Not trying to be overly pessimistic, but things normally take more time than you expect them to take

    My guess if they are doing it right. They are story boarding what they want to create. Looking into main stories they want to go after launch. Deciding what maps this will happen on. A year from now they should be play testing some of the content. 6 months after launch the expansion should be ready for play testing at a beta level. If IS is smart.
  • RocketFarmerRocketFarmer Member, Alpha Two
    I’m expecting, based on the design, that rather than expansions we will see more tools/content added to the event system. New dungeons and monsters/world bosses might be in that tool box. Believe they are setting things up campaign style, based on the player choices of course. So you could have one collection of content for a single node that could be replayable for many years based on what the players do with no two servers having the same experience. In other words a simulated world that changes over time. Think of it like they are providing the PHB, DMG and MM to go play D&D, and then have the tools set up for you to do just that.

    Given that “expansions” could be focused and produced more frequently with minimal development resources, we might not even notice the “new” content. If they build it right, that is.
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    My guess if they are doing it right. They are story boarding what they want to create. Looking into main stories they want to go after launch. Deciding what maps this will happen on. A year from now they should be play testing some of the content. 6 months after launch the expansion should be ready for play testing at a beta level. If IS is smart.
    Well, time will tell.

    My concern is that when studio adds an expansion/update/patch every X months, it should contain enough content/new stuff that will retain players for those X months till the next one. Unfortunately, it's sometimes not the case and it leads to a loss of a certain percentage of player base. Some of them will return after the next expansion/update/patch gets released, but some won't. As a result, the number of players will slowly reduce over time and that may be a reason to worry when it comes to a game with a subscription-based monetization model. Player retention (as well as new player acquisition) should be amongst the top priorities.
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • RocketFarmerRocketFarmer Member, Alpha Two
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    My guess if they are doing it right. They are story boarding what they want to create. Looking into main stories they want to go after launch. Deciding what maps this will happen on. A year from now they should be play testing some of the content. 6 months after launch the expansion should be ready for play testing at a beta level. If IS is smart.

    Given my estimate of 3-5 years in Alpha 2 there should be plenty of time to story board a decade of story/event content.
  • MyosotysMyosotys Member
    edited October 8
    Intrepid should really tip the balance in favor of slower leveling. For the simple reason that if leveling is too fast, it will be politically very complicated to slow it down. I can already imagine all the controversy and bad publicity this will create.

    And for years to come, the first players (who enjoyed faster leveling) will be and stay those who haven't deserved their character and will suffer the criticism of other players.

    If, on the other hand, leveling is too slow, almost no one will mind speeding it up.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Slower is almost always better. I hate games where you get a cool new weapon and in less then a day you out level it and don't get to enjoy the item. Same with content I hate out leveling area's I did not get to experience on the way to max level.
    That does not really seem to be a likely scenario for an estimated 45 days to Level 50 if you play 4 hours per day. Because relatively few people will be playing as much as 4 hours per day. You would have to be trying to race through the content for that.

    Again... I think very few if any people in this thread are fans of fast Leveling. But, 225 hours to max Adventurer Level is not fast for an MMORPG.

    Also, Ashes is a dynamic game, rather than a static game. We don't really out-Level areas. A region's Level rises and falls as Towns/Cities/Metros are constructed and destroyed.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Does everyone agree that fun should trump leveling speed? I think I would be fine with whatever speed they come up with as long as the leveling and “end game” is fun.

    Or maybe they need to design a short game and long game into this. Short game to satisfy those who want and need immediate gratification and long game for those who really savor the journey.
    I don't recall seeing anyone here ask for a short Leveling speed.
    I think almost everyone here savors the journey - up to around 250 hours of focused gameplay to reach Adventurer Level 50. And then Flanker wants that to be significantly longer than 250 hours.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    Additionally, it is always possible to increase leveling speed with little to no backfire, properly utilizating Rested HP systems, food buffs etc. In case of necessity, obviously. However, there is no way you can possibly make it slower without a massive outrage.

    P.S. I've read literally the same comment on reddit today. Gonna let the post age a bit as it has been posted recently and send it here as well.
    The current Ashes design already allows players to make the journey to Level 50 Adventurer last much longer than 225 hours - if that's what they want to do.
  • nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    nanfoodle wrote: »
    My guess if they are doing it right. They are story boarding what they want to create. Looking into main stories they want to go after launch. Deciding what maps this will happen on. A year from now they should be play testing some of the content. 6 months after launch the expansion should be ready for play testing at a beta level. If IS is smart.
    Well, time will tell.

    My concern is that when studio adds an expansion/update/patch every X months, it should contain enough content/new stuff that will retain players for those X months till the next one. Unfortunately, it's sometimes not the case and it leads to a loss of a certain percentage of player base. Some of them will return after the next expansion/update/patch gets released, but some won't. As a result, the number of players will slowly reduce over time and that may be a reason to worry when it comes to a game with a subscription-based monetization model. Player retention (as well as new player acquisition) should be amongst the top priorities.

    My estimation is that Naval Combat will be the first expansion. I don't think they're going to make it into lunch just my two cents
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited October 8
    Yep. Studios might fail at implementing their design. That doesn't mean that you should change the design during early Alpha based on an assumption by some players that the design might fail - before the dev vision has even been tested.
    The Everquest devs, many of who are working on Ashes, have always been the ones who dropped new Expansions the fastest. Also, in the past 2-3 years studios have become much better at delivering Seasonal content updates every 3-4 months rather than just every 12-18 months.

    Number of players for Ashes is going to be significantly reduced in any case because it did not release Before 2020 - and there are no other games that have solved the Endgame problem already via their Seasonal updates - including WoW. And there are several other MMORPGs in production that will likely release before Ashes.
    Where, in 2017, I thought that Ashes was either going to be the savior of MMORPGs by putting an end to Endgame or I would just stop playing MMORPGs... I now have 5 games I'm trying to play that have put an end to Endgame, including WoW, and I can barely keep up with the Seasonal updates.

    225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer is already long for an MMORPG.
    Sure, gamers who get a huge dopamine rush from finally completing a long, arduous journey would love to have it take 450 or 1K hours of focused gameplay to Level 50.
    But, most players would abandon Ashes and go find a game where it takes closer to 100 hours or even 250 hours.
    There's a reason that Steven, who has played Lineage 2 (and a ton of other MMORPGs) and the Intrepid devs (from Everquest and other MMORPGs) are aiming for 225 hours of focused gameplay to reach Level 50 Adventurer, but also including numerous other progression paths for those who want to extend the progression journey past 225 hours.
    Inidividual gamers who have very limited experience with MMORPGs might not understand that reason - especially when they have impenetratble confirmation bias. Despite the personal manifestos they may have written to support their biased (paranoid/pessimistic) perspective.

    225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer is not fast Leveling for an MMORPG.
  • AszkalonAszkalon Member, Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    Haha let's not start that again on the forum. If the time comes, we'd rather make a Round 2 cuz even talking for 2,5 hours on stream was still much more efficient from time management perspective compared to talking on the forum

    The Power of the Forum compells You to discuss, Flanker. :mrgreen:

    Kidding. But i don't necessarily dislike the Discussions on the Forum. Soon, we will have way more to Discuss when we finally get to testing and can exchange our Impressions. :sunglasses:
    a50whcz343yn.png
    ✓ Occasional Roleplayer
    ✓ Guild is " Balderag's Garde " for now. (German)
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    Aszkalon wrote: »
    But i don't necessarily dislike the Discussions on the Forum.
    Neither do I, but they are significantly less meaningful and/or efficient than the actual face-to-face discussions.

    People may say whatever they want about Dygz, but he agreed to have that (technically) 1v1 discussion/debate and that fact alone is worth respect.
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • RoisindvbhRoisindvbh Member, Alpha Two
    As someone who played WoW at launch, I would say the slower the better. There is just never going to be another launch experience once the first one is done. New content will be significantly smaller going forward and even people joining down the road will have guides on how to level as quickly as possible. That first "going in blind" experience is a one time thing to be savored.
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    Roisindvbh wrote: »
    As someone who played WoW at launch, I would say the slower the better. There is just never going to be another launch experience once the first one is done. New content will be significantly smaller going forward and even people joining down the road will have guides on how to level as quickly as possible. That first "going in blind" experience is a one time thing to be savored.
    Good point. I never used it as I thought it was kind of "too subjective", but yeah, I'm glad you brought this up, because it is actually true.
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    Roisindvbh wrote: »
    As someone who played WoW at launch, I would say the slower the better. There is just never going to be another launch experience once the first one is done. New content will be significantly smaller going forward and even people joining down the road will have guides on how to level as quickly as possible. That first "going in blind" experience is a one time thing to be savored.
    Good point. I never used it as I thought it was kind of "too subjective", but yeah, I'm glad you brought this up, because it is actually true.

    Opposite of true for me.

    I would always want the first time experience to be very similar to later experiences in terms of the mechanical aspects of leveling such as time taken, gear available (sorta) and ability to impact economy.

    I believe that the experience of starting a new MMO, beyond the first few days when everyone is trying to play it, should be close to what the gameplay is the rest of the time.

    Of course, the longer you make leveling, the less true the above is, because the 'going in blind' and so on only applies to a few people. People who write guides or make content do so very quickly. Then people who like following guides follow them regardless of optimization/quality. People who like going in blind ignore them even years later.

    No impact, to me.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    Azherae wrote: »
    Opposite of true for me.
    "... it is actually true for some players" - right, that's how I should have phrased it.

    But yeah, as I said, it is pretty subjective and your comment confirms it, as we have different preferences when it comes to this.
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • ThevoicestHeVoIcEsThevoicestHeVoIcEs Member, Alpha Two
    edited October 8
    I tend to find levelling in a lot of modern MMOs too quick, especially if you invest some time into gathering/crafting professions, or PvP, then you start out levelling the PvE content / story content. Some people don't mind that, others don't do non-PvE activities at all, so its a tricky thing to balance.

    I have played various types of MMOs, and I lean towards slower levelling, but also don't like massive power gaps between levels, whatever in PvE or PvP. In PvE level power gap makes the world smaller and smaller as you level, as the vast majority of the game world content becomes irrelevant for the player. For me it always felt like wasted game dev time for game content which becomes useless as soon as you leave a certain level bracket.

    In PvP its a matter having a good fight. Whatever games you play, skill and power gap between player teams can lead to fairly boring experience for both the winning and losing side, if the fight is really one-sided.
    My lungs taste the air of Time,
    Blown past falling sands…
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    edited October 8
    For me it always felt like wasted game dev time for game content which becomes useless as soon as you leave a certain level bracket.
    Correct. Among other arguments, I mentioned this one as well in this thread (just with a bit different phrasing): https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/60737/ashes-of-creation-must-dodge-this-bullet/p1

    Additionally, it doesn't only apply to the content. It also affects the low and mid-level economy segments.
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • Again the leveling speed is fine people actually want to be able to make and play alt characters especially with the range of available classes. Increasing the leveling time would make trying out different classes and getting them to max level a ball ache.
  • FlankerFlanker Member, Alpha Two
    Pendragxn wrote: »
    Again the leveling speed is fine people actually want to be able to make and play alt characters especially with the range of available classes. Increasing the leveling time would make trying out different classes and getting them to max level a ball ache.
    > You have 8 secondary archetypes that you can change if you want to without a necessity to make an alt.

    > if you want to try different archetypes - you have years of Alpha 2 and Beta phases ahead.

    > If you want to change your primary archetype and make an alt - by all means, go for it. It shouldn't be easy though. While "easy alts" are not a problem for many MMOs, they are a problem for a game like Ashes.

    > Prior to sharing your opinion, you need to think about what you're about to say from all possible perspectives instead of saying "uhhh well some people want it"
    n8ohfjz3mtqg.png
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited October 8
    Secondary Archetype does not change a character's gender or Race - nor does it allow you to explore the Active Skills of a diffwerent Primary Archetype. Plenty of reasons to have alts - before or after reaching Level 50 Adventurer.
    Ashes is an RPG; not a just a PvP game.

    I think most of the people in this thread are fine with "slow" Leveling - where 225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer is slow in comparison to the vast majority of MMORPGs.

    If you want to prolong your journey to Level 50 Adventurer past 225 hours by pursuing the other progression paths, you can do that.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »
    Prior to sharing your opinion, you need to think about what you're about to say from all possible perspectives instead of saying "uhhh well some people want it".
    Exactly, Mr. Pot.

  • ZehlanZehlan Member, Alpha Two
    Flanker wrote: »

    > Prior to sharing your opinion, you need to think about what you're about to say from all possible perspectives instead of saying "uhhh well some people want it"[/b]

    Can this guy get any more obnoxious lol the answer is yes but anyway.

    K Let's have some fun today. Flanker know all these games you have had all this experience in that is the basis for all your claims. Nothing before 18 or from pirate servers in other words servers that weren't the original companies who created the game. I do remember you saying that you had played a subscription based MMO I am curious to know that one.

    Also couple more polls for your Statistical Analysis. These ones are from three years ago leaning the same way as the last poll I posted did! Which shows the consensus that over the last few years opinions haven't changed and on top of that the comments also support that.


    Steven has already confirmed on stream that the average time to reach the maximum level will be 45 days playing 4-6 hours a day, do you think this time is adequate? if a player plays 12 hours/day can reach mas level in 2 weeks

    My opinion is that this is a very short time, I have serious concerns about character development, the feeling of reward for leveling up, the feeling of progression, and whether or not it will be healthy for the overall game environment.

    As a former lineage player i have the memory of low level groups formed to grind in Cruma Tower , low grade pvps, small fights almost all the time, my fear is the game is too easy and the leveling becomes obsolete, and the end of the monotonous game and very dependent on the events (siege and caravans).

    Sorry about my poor grammar, i'm from Brasil.
    Closed • 743 total votes
    413
    45 days 4-6 hours, are good enough.
    174
    90 days 4-6 hours, I think something more challenging is more exciting and can bring more benefits to the game.
    89
    180 days 4-6hours, i want be rewarded for every mob killed and that i can also stand out through my level.
    67
    At least a year, i dont care about casuals.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/AshesofCreation/comments/nsvat5/about_time_do_reach_max_level/

    How Many Hours Should It Take to Reach Max Level?
    Discussion
    Just wondering how grindy people here think the game should be to but max level? Also for this poll, assume that the server already has metropolis nodes, so you're not time gated by the node system when it comes to leveling.
    Closed • 2K total votes
    votes hours
    600 100
    449 200
    291 300
    234 500
    401 1000


    https://www.reddit.com/r/AshesofCreation/comments/sj7tjw/how_many_hours_should_it_take_to_reach_max_level/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Sign In or Register to comment.