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.
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.
Comments
You say you stated the simple 'fact' that having to work more for something causes a person to value it more, but actually, a lot of the time, the reason that happens to human brains isn't healthy for them in the first place.
As for the leveling milestones thing, there are games out there for which 'just grinding longterm for a goal' is good. Ashes might even be one of those games. But it's oversimplifying to say 'only leveling milestones are taken into account' because leveling milestones are not even the same type of enjoyment as the other things unless the game is designed phenomenally well, and usually off a different, more PvE basis.
The reasons why leveling specifically should not be longer are many. I don't know if you just want to specifically devalue Dygz's opinion, but the way you're doing it means that unfortunately I now 'have to' argue with you, and I really don't want to.
Hopefully Dygz will just 'accept that you are wrong about this and misrepresenting the discussion', before this gets any more discouraging.
Also, regarding the statistics thing, I'm also pretty sure you 'can't do that'. It's a thing my sales reps used to do to explicitly convince clients to implement the features that top management wanted to focus on for their stuff. It's a huge red flag to me in conversation because it's quite literally the 'go tell the client that X% of users do Y' knowing that they won't take that back to their own stats/numbers people.
I haven't read it all, and I don't want to make assumptions based on my parser, so short question, do you happen to be in Sales?
Just because you state something does not make it true.
In an RPG, the primary goal is intended to be Class progression. Achieving enough XP to reach the next Class Level milestone. You could do a bunch of other fun stuff that doesn't contribute to Adventurer Leveling, like focus on Artisan path Leviling, but when people are focused on the Adventurer path Leveling, they're going to want the dopamine hits that come from seeing a reasonable amount of progress for the time they spent during their game session. Doesn't have to be a powerful one.
Sure, addicts who are playing 16 hours per day, might need a powerful hit.
Someone who is playing 16 hours per day is going to want it to take much longer to reach Level 50 than someone playing 2-4 hours per day, but... more importantly....
The person who is playing 2-4 hours per day is going to want that to translate into a significant amount of progress, rather than a miniscule amount of progress.
There is no surprise that a person playing 16 hours per day wouldn't care if it takes 1K hours to reach Level 50, while someone playing 4 hours per day is going to want to see a significant amount of progress on their XP Progress Bar for their 4 hours. And if they don't see signifcant progress, that's going to cause frustration rather than a dopamine hit.
Nope. You stated that everyone gets a major dopamine hit when they complete an activity that takes a lot of time and effort. I said that's not true of everyone - that is just one personality type and one playstyle.
Also I said, sure, it makes sense that someone for whom it is true that they get a major dopamine hit from activities that are very time comsuming and arduous are going to advocate for a very long Leveling speed.
That's all I need to know. I don't need you to try to explain anything else after that.
Especially when their confirmation bias is so strong they think everyone feels the same way.
Also, you'll notice that people in the US tend to get paid every 80 hours rather than every 400 hours or every 1000 hours. And that we often calculate expected pay by 1 hour increments: Minimum wage is $16/hour.
Sure, we might also talk about $30K/year - but people are not going to feel more accomplished waiting an entire year to receive that $30K.
LMFAO
This is really just your public confession about your confirmation bias.
You see only two options: the journey to Level 50 Adventurer being significantly longer than 225 hours or instantant gratification.
Standard Leveling to 50 in MMORPGs is 100 hours. And that is not instant gratification. It's standard gratification.
22 hours to Level 50 is fast - something like Throne and Liberty is exceedingly fast.
225 hours to Level 50 is long for an MMORPG but reasonable. And has nothing at all to do with instant gratification. Maybe for someone who plays video games 16 hours a day, 225 hours to Level 50 seems fast.
I'm not the one who's ignoring that. Ashes does provide multiple separate progression paths. That is the entire point. 225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer is sufficient because there are many other progression paths that are separate from Adventurer path Leveling.
There is no reason to try to roll all of those different progression paths into one.
And is inifinitely better to have then separate so that people who play for 2-4 hours per day can feel they have made significant progress each time the log in. Rather than have them feel like they ddid not accomplish very much during the time they had to play.
Instant gratification is not a factor in my logic.
225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer only seems like instant gratification to you because you are a game addict who plays 16 hours per day.
I also did not say anything like "chasing powerful dopamine doses is bad". That is just the way your brain twists reality to support your confirmation bias.
You have only played Lineage II and NW, so you have no clue why modern MMORPGs are... what they are.
I think everyone here thinks that people used to hit Endgame much too quickly between 2010 and 2021 - when games were designed such that the average player could hit Level 50 in 60-100 hours and then we had to wait 12-18 months for an Expansion. Therefore, we needed a solution to but an end to Endgame.
Ashes offers several solutions for that - including doubling the hours to Level 50 as well as offering many other
Ashes has plenty of other Leveling paths besides the Adventurer path, so we don't stop Leveling just because we reach Level 50 Adventurer. And 225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer does not mean it's only 225 hours to Endgame. Especially because Ashes doesn't have an Endgame. And also, by design, we don't have to wait 12-18 months for an Expansion to experience brand new content.
Arbitrarily extending the hours of focused gameplay to Level 50 Adventurer isn't necessary for Ashes because the devs have designed many other solutions already. Better solutions than merely extending Leveling speed for the Advneturer path. Instant gratification has nothing to do with 225 hours to Level 50 Adventurer.
It's just your game addicted brain that has you viewing that as fast Leveling and instant gratification.
Nice story, sounds quite regular and avarage to me (and what's typical in mid-western europe), just seems to be like you were accelerating a bit and got some luck as well (or small competition within company or from the market overall). Very good sales managers are available like sand on the beach (in my region/markets), that's why I'm saying this (no offense meant). Selling things is one thing, knowing and executing (delivering) things, another thing.
How should it, it's only a bit and brief story about some few working years, that's all. With 32, as I've said, your experience in life (and business) is what it is, a very short span - if you work on the next 10, 20, 30 years ofc your experience and knowledge will increase significantly and your story will be longer. Hopefully your "on/off" mode, regarding your pace when it comes to regular working time, will work out over the years. My experience is, without being extremely lucky: It will not. In the long run it will not pay off. Moreover, the art is to keep the pace on a permanent level, if possible, high level (but not too high). Exaggerating makes no sense, because it's only a tiny sprint in the entire life. When it comes to the real art, it's performing over years, not performing for only 5 years or whatever. Within the first 2-3 years in a company the learning curve and increase in value always is high, the difficulties and higher responsibilities start after much more years.
But, your circumstances, your life, your decision. All the best.
Perhaps your content creation part provides you with enough money - perhaps your appearance and behavior in this thread will help and is good marketing for you? I don't know, I'm usualy not watching youtubers and if, only very few and with really mature and reasonable content, which is rare.
Fair. We will not talk about it, it seems to be too private. All the best.
I do, but that depends on Ashes, at least a major part of it. I'm willing to play MMOs and did that >20 years, as mentioned, so from my side, sure, I'm ready. But Ashes has to deliver. From probably 15 MMOs I've played only 4 bound me more than 1 year. WoW, GW2, ESO and I guess FF14 and NW, but both barely over one year. Perhaps Rift also was over one year, can't remember. Warhammer, Aion, Tera, Neverwinter and some more I've just played for some month, because I didnt like them.
So yes, hm.
Sounds reasonable. New World can be taken as quite good (and recent) comparison for some features/parallels.
The reason lies behind general behavior of humans, bias, attitude, education, social environment, culturual aspects, age (maturity), experience. So, there are more than enough reasons that lead to a competitive type of player in a computer game or another type of player in a computer game. And, within other context, that also applies to other topics in private and especially business life. I'm absolutely different in business life than in private life and within executing a hobby, like gaming. So, by contrast, I see no reason why I should use everything I possibly can when it comes to competition in a game, because I face it every day in my working life, ~60 hours per week and here for very good reasons and with lots of responsibilty, because beside the fun, it pays off (in a financial and material way). I don't need and want the same all over in my spare time, at least not all the time. When it comes to this part the main values are: Entertainment, relaxing, consuming. Because gaming is not the center of my life.
We may find plenty of examples when it is unhealthy. We may find plenty of examples when it healthy.
A simple comparison I used in our podcast is "working at your age to earn money yourself" or just "getting them from your parents for the sole reasons of you existing and being their son/daughter". Pretty sure you perfectly understand the point that I want to make with that comparison.
I only pointed out that Dygz hyperfocuses on achieving leveling milestones, despite ignoring various other milestones that are available in numerous progression paths and activities that he himself mentions.
It's entirely possible that they exist. As well as a number of reasons why leveling should be longer. Their existence is not mutually exclusive.
There is a difference between "devaluing" and "dissecting" to highlight the flaws, inaccuracies, fallacies, biases and contradictions.
Wrong on what exactly?
I didn't really get the reference to your empirical experience (which is, as I'm pretty sure you are aware of, can't be used as a valid argument in a conversation/debate, due to it's... limited sample size? Don't know how to say that in English properly, but I guess you understand the point, don't you?)
Yes, I did. I was both a sales manager and a Head of Sales Department, leading a team of ~30+ sales managers at peak.
However...
No, actually, HOWEVER
If I'm about to see an implication that I'm intentionally using some... manipulation tactics or tricks solely because of the fact that I've been in those positions at some point in my life, I will have to stop you right there. As long as I called out several people multiple times on using manipulations of all sorts (biases, misrepresentation of points and twisting the words, logical fallacies etc.), I am now in the position, in which if I ever dare to use any of those tricks myself - that would instantly make me a hypocrite. You may question my intelligence if you want to, go for it, but I am not dumb to do that, especially publicly.
Once again, it wasn't me who brought up those threads with polls - all I did was applying simple math to the poll results that were used as "a valid argument" by other people.
If for whatever reason you think that using weighed mean is not the right thing to do and/or there are more accurate ways to analyze the poll results - please (you or anyone else) provide a detailed explanation why. And by detatiled explanation, I mean something better than short meaningless comments such "It's not right", "You can't do it that way" etc. that were written by several people.
And this statement is ridiculous itself. We live in 2024 and I don't necessarily need to play the game to understand what the game is about. I can watch YouTube overviews and longplays, I can watch streamers on Twitch playing it in real time, I can read blogs and articles etc.
Not addressing anything else as it's a waste of time. The comment sections under both videos on my channel and Theory Forge channel is full of comments saying that you argue for the sake of arguing, playing semantics and extrapolate your personal preferences on everyone. Even your fellow co-hosts asked you to chill a couple of times throughout the stream. Yet you prefer to remain stubborn.
If you want Round 2 - you know where to find me and you know that I'll be ready to continue any day any time (obviously, when I'm not playing A2 in those few days when servers are up, as I said initially on discord).
Reading articles is not the same thing as playing. And playing games is not the same thing as being a game dev.
As Steven learned when is gamer mind led him to believe he could release Ashes of Creation Before 2020 - even though anyone with actual game dev experience could tell that was an absurd expectation.
Facts are facts.
Just because some gamers can't understand what I'm saying does not mean what I'm saying isn't true.
Lots of gamers miss nuance - especially those who don't have game dev experience.
You are the one who said that everyone has your perspective regarding dopamine hits for long, tedious activities. I never claimed that everyone has my playstyle.
And, sure, white people have different cultural expectations when it comes to discussion rules during disagreements - especially when it comes to interuptions.
I was quite chill during our episode of the Ashen Forge. You would get a hint that I'm not chill if I start name-calling you...especially if I added in some choice curse words... and even THAT could be chill by black culture standards.
I don't need a "Round 2".
I can find you easily enough here in the forums. We have already had many Rounds on this topic.
And I already know that nothing anyone says will penetrate your confrimation bias.
I specifically addressed your "accusations" during the podcast. You ignored them. Repeating "confirmation bias" 10 times without providing any valid proof of that won't get you far.
And of course, you wouldn't want Round 2, because you know perfectly well how exactly would it go and how exactly would it end.
On topic everything (between us) is said: I'm a time casual and for me round about 6 month leveling time seems to be fine. I don't care whether it's 200, 180, 225 or 260 hours. Really, I don't. As long as the journey to max level is fun, I appreciate it. As long as it feels rewarding to level up and learn and experience more aspects of my character, the game, the environment, the systems - it's fine for me (it's a role, a character, there must be progression from the first login until your way to max-level, to get/feel/be stronger). I wouldnt appreciate something like one year leveling, but that's also valid for only 1-2 month leveling. Frequent players, if there are not time sinks, will be on max, if they want to rush, in few month, some weeks. That's fine for me personally, that's like it is in every MMO. If some players need 1 year to be max level - so be it. It's their pace, it's ok, if they have enough fun with it or only can play few hours a month. Leveling is no mechanical question about hours and time, but about having fun and the well known phrase: The journey is the reward.
"Everyone else but me has a confirmation bias."
Of course nothing I say about your confirmation bias is going to seem valid to you.
I do know perfectly well exactly how it would go. You would continue to spout the same ridiculous stuff you have for pages and pages and pages and hours and hours and hours.
Because no one can penetrate your confirmation bias.
I'm reading through the comments on our Ashen Forge video now and see that some people agree with me and several of the people who claim to disagree with me do not correctly mirror back what I actually said.
The comments section on the Ashen Forge Channel don't really say what you claim they say. It's certainly not FULL of comments that say what you claim.
I'm not sure why you presented it as if no one agrees with what I said. Other than your confirmation bias causing you to overlook that.
"I'm not sure why you presented it as if no one agrees with what I said" - good job once again on disagreeing with a statement I never made. However, the overwhelming majority of comments are not in your favor.
It's funny how you are fine with everyone who "agreed" with you, but everyone else "did not correctly mirror back what you said". If that's not a definition a confirmation bias, then I don't know what is.
And ofc you checked them on your channel, but you didn't check them on mine, or you checked them and decided not to mention. Funnily enough, we both know why.
I'm not even mentioning that one of the commentators out there... is a person from the forum who is not a big fan of mine and "a big supporter of you" because he would support anyone who disagrees with me. Stylometry analysis estimates the chance of YT comments and forum comments being written by the same person to be in the 80-90% range.
I don't actually care about it, it's just data in the end.
Whether you did it intentionally or not really doesn't change the fact that you're not supposed to use that data like that in genuine conversation. If you choose to insist on it, then I'll take it as the end of genuine conversation on that aspect of it. You were talking to Zehlan anyway and seem more interested in somehow 'humiliating' or 'taunting' them than actually respecting the points being made.
For everyone else, sorry for adding another post that's just a retreat, but tl;dr, yes, Flanker is using stats in that way that you're really not supposed to, but it's not worth your effort to look into it. (Flanker you can ignore this too, this type of post is directed at a certain subset of people who interact with this forum basically by reading my Comments page).
There were only 32 commnets when I checked and like I said, some people agreed with me and several of the ones who claimed to disagree with me did not properly mirror back what I said. Same strawman fallacy that you use.
I don't know what you mean by "fine with". I am fine with all of the comments.
I did not say "everyone else did not correctly mirror back what I said". That is another of your strawman fallacies. What I said was "several of the people who claim to disagree with me do not correctly mirror back what I actually said."
Thus, the comments section on the Ashen Forge is not FULL of comments saying that I argue for the sake of arguing, playing semantics and extrapolate my personal preferences on everyone. Which is what you claimed.
I haven't looked at your YouTube channel at all. And have no interest in doing so.
I go by what you say, here, in the Forums.
Well, but you are mentioning that for some reason. I'm skeptical of your perception of this person from the Forum who is "not a big fan of yours and a big supporter of me" because I've seen you dismiss valid arguments with that claim, "Oh, you just don't like me, but you will agree with anything Dygz says just because you like him."
And, yeah, I'm gonna call stylometry analysis of YT comments irrelevant snake oil.
The thing is, I don't. I genuinely asked if there is anyone who can provide a decent detailed clarification why those numbers can't be used that way. Dygz may say that I have a "confirmation bias" as many times as he want - it is simply not true. I would have literally 0 issues with agreeing, if someone actually does what I ask for in a proper way, not just "It's wrong". I don't mind being proven wrong, as in the end of the day that would make reconsider my opinions and evolve as a human being.
See, that's exactly what I'm talking about. People who don't follow the conversation from the start get a wrong impression about the actual situation. Here is the first message from Zehlan about this topic:
As you can see, this "kind gentleman" started the conversation with dumb accusations based on thin air, all of which got easily debunked afterwards. In fact, he wasn't really interested in a conversation, he was mostly looking for an echo chamber of like-minde individuals to circleplease each other.
Just as I said, if there is anyone out there who is capable of providing a reasonable explanation why it doesn't work that way, I'm all ears.
Ugh... same thing over and over again. There is a reason why almost a dozen of people combined from both comment section said that... the way you handle a 1v1 conversation is... somewhat questionable. Despite the fact that it was still much more civil that it is on this forum. Just think about it for a second, what if they actually had a valid reason to say that? I'll leave it to you
You obviously understood the point I was making, but pretend that you don't. Let me rephrase it for you then: does it mean that every single person that did not agree with your opinion "did not correctly mirror back what you said" or there were actually people who disagreed with you for valid reasons? A simple "A" or "B" question.
How convenient. But yeah, you do you
Yup, I do. Should have written "I have not even mentioned.... before" - tenses are not my strongest side in English, unfortunately.
Nope, I haven't dismissed a single argument because of that. I said that it was the only reason why person wrote what they wrote because I don't see any other reason why someone would use a meaningless argument in a desperate attempt to overwhelm me.
I said that already and I'll repeat that again. There is difference between a "decent argument" and "argument that is strong enough to change my mind".
If I see that "strong enough" argument - I wouldn't care who writes that, you, Noaani, Zehlan, Azherae or anyone else. If it is strong enough, then I will just accept it, because that's what rational people must do by default and I aim to be that person.
Ofc you would. But in general, it's obviously not a 100% proof and that's why I mentioned that the estimated chance by the software was 80-90%. But stylometry can provide good results, obviously, if you have a decent sample of both texts. Not gonna go into details, but a few times it helped me a lot in my work and people who thought that they were anonymous found out that they were not. Wish I took a photo of their surprised faces. Anyways...
Here's my reasoning: with the rule that "players who are 9 or 10 levels lower than the highest level player in a party will not gain XP," this effectively narrows the level gap between casual and hardcore players for a longer duration. Experienced players can continue to assist lower-level players without immediately surpassing that 10-level threshold.
As a result, hardcore players can provide meaningful support to casual players over an extended period, fostering a more inclusive and engaging leveling experience for everyone involved.
I maybe crazy in assuming that, but as hardcore player who likes to help out his other friends/guildies/and casual players. This would help me do so.
Just one thought i had, ill most likely will be posting more in here once I've done more research myself. But feel like this is something that was over looked from both sides.
A good example of this would be if a group of 4 friends, Let say myself and 2 others just turned level 20, so 3 of us just turned level 20. Our other friend just turned level 11. We would be able to invite him to group and go about xyz leveling activity that is challenging for the 3 of us at level 20. During that time we are killing mobs lets say 5 levels above us, so level 25. We will be gaining decent xp since we are killing mobs 5 levels above us. But our level 11 friend will be gaining exceptional exp towards their level since the mobs will be 14 levels then them, therefore they will be closing the level gap quicker. They may gain 2-3 levels in the time it takes us to gain one. Lets say now they gain that 2-3 levels in that 2 hour span and we may not even gain one. Even if us 3 at higher level continue to play after our friends logs, It will still let him join our group the next day because they are still within that 9-10 level range from highest player in group.
It has been mentioned here: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/60737/ashes-of-creation-must-dodge-this-bullet/p1
I wouldn't say it's a direct argument in favor of longer leveling or that it is somehow helps casual players specifically.
It's more of a... one of the factors that contribute to the leveling getting faster over time. And if you combine all those factors and take them into account, it becomes pretty obvious that the "default" 225 hours may end up actually being, for example, 125-150-175 hours eventually (depending on how many of those factors a particular player takes advantage of and the cumulative effect of those factors combined), instead of the original 225 hours.
I wouldn't expect random higher level players carrying lower level players often, but theoretically - that may occur from time to time
Where i'm coming from on this is from my personal experience in other games mmorpg's and others where i have played with friends and i do consider myself a hardcore player due to my personality when it comes to games i like, that being if its a game i really enjoy i tend to go all out on it. At times leaving my friends in the dust and having to start Alts just to be back to their level so we can all level and participate again as a group and me not doing all the work and them just trying to stay alive.
As for not expecting random higher level players to help out carrying lower level players often. And once again this is from personal experience. It will happen more then you think. Its what having a guild and being involve in a guild is all about, to help even the weakest member in your guild improve quicker so you can become stronger as a guild as a unite. To me these are going to be the majority of the guilds out their, or ones that you see last the longest. Ones that help their members progress in the game.
I mean, I could cite myself here, as I have been a guest lecturer for graduate level statistics (note, guest), but I somehow don't think you would accept that.
What I am trying to do, while you are kicking and screaming refusing it, is to educate you. You shouldn't need a source for this, you should just be able to see that it is wrong by looking at the results you got.
You took the results of a poll, averaged them, and the result was unsurprisingly in the middle of the options given. Since the bulk of votes were made at either end, the middle ground represents the least amount of people.
To then go and say that the poll results are that people want that middle ground is just incorrect. If that is what people wanted, that is what people would have voted for, since there were middle ground options.
Asking for sources for something this basic (this is first week statistics 101), is kind of like asking someone to cite references for the statement that 2+2=4 (though I can give real examples of when even that isn't true).
Your arrogance and ignorance clearly has no limits, he wasn't wrong.
Kicking and screaming? I mean, if believing that helps to you to sleep at night, I don't mind it. Those who watched the podcast, know for a fact that I'm a pretty calm person even when debate is heated.
So all I heard so far is that the results are wrong. Not a single soul yet managed to explain why, apart from just saying they are wrong. Brilliant. Following that logic, I can't just say that you, Noaani, is wrong and that's it. I don't need to say anything anymore, point proven. And if you need sources - this is such a basic thing and I don't really want to waste my time lecturing you about kindergarden level logic.
I'm still wondering whether Mr Lecturer is aware of the difference between arithmetic mean and weighed mean, but whatever. "Averaged" is not the right word for it as it implies arithmetic mean.
"Just incorrect" - a perfect explanation.
You do realize that all other options are there, so that people could vote for them, right?
What's your suggestion then? To take into account only the first option and ignore 44,4% of players who want leveling to take at least 90 days? Is that how it works in your head? To only take into account those people whose opinion alignes with yours?
It doesn't matter if you provide 10 more irrelevant scornful comparisons - I couldn't care less. Had you actually a valid source to prove your point - you would do that, as it'd take a few clicks. But instead, you prefer to write paragraphs trying to convince how easy it would be.
I've seen the same thing in another thread already where you complained about "irrelevant statistics" and was very confident until several people told you that you talk about something that have 0 knowledge about and everything was fine.
Keep squirming, it's very entertaining to watch
Was the poll meant for an election of choice or just a polling of opinion? Was everyone offered to enter their own values or did they pick from a preselected list? Could bias the results. Poll results also tend to identify the opinions of that specific point in time since opinions tend to change over time, therefore you’d need to poll the same people on the same question to get another data point. Even more if you’re trying to determine a trend. So stating there was a poll take months or years ago, therefore it’s settled, isn’t really an argument.
I don’t really place that much reliance on polls nor by the statistics derived from them. Especially on a forum for an MMORPG where we do not control development but are invited guests at the table. I’ve stated I am in the slower leveling camp, even the extreme end of that. But I recognize that my opinion doesn’t override Steven’s design nor does it invalidate those who would like leveling to take less time. We’re just on here to push the envelope of ideas that might just end up with a new idea to make a would be game better. However most of the time not. We’re just filling time waiting for Alpha 2 to start.
If Intrepid wanted a more accurate measure of leveling speed with player feedback, then they could test that in Alpha 2. Not as a representation of the final release leveling experience, obviously, but just in terms of testing various rates of progression and illiciting feedback. What does a faster or slower rate feel like? Best to do this in Wave 3 so that the various leveling systems are somewhat represented. A simple test would be half of the current rate and double the current rate (2 hrs/level, 4.5 hrs/level, 9 hrs/level). Since I believe Alpha 2 will take 2-5 years to get to Beta 1, there’s plenty of time to experiment and get opinions that would be more grounded with game play/testing. Everyone seems to base their opinions on other games they’ve played, some where slow leveling experiences were positive and others with literal hell levels. Would be interesting to see where Ashes fits in that range.
I would also be interested in seeing how the rates change from player experience/knowledge of the game. Theoretically we can say the rate should decrease as player experience increases, but quantifying that is what we need to know. If Ashes is as dynamic a game as Steven intends it to be, then player experience should be less significant on the rate of leveling (whether that’s power leveling or the other types of leveling). That might satisfy a portion of the slower camp, to a degree. And with that would be seeing the rate they can add new content seamlessly to a dynamic environment, which I know we’ll have to wait for the Betas or launch. Until then we have the sand box portion of the game to tinker with, and ideally leveling isn’t as critical for that aspect, but we’ll have to see won’t we.
Your expectations = your own responsibility/problems. I could expect people not to throw dumb random accusations and not to make assumptions based on thin air, but here you are.
Oh, so in your opinion, this is a proper respectful way to start a conversation, huh? With ridiculous accusations solely because my suggestion triggered you so much?
> I can't be a "big WoW carebare" because I never played WoW
> If you keep parroting the same bs about "click bait for the video", here are the stats. A thread was posted on Sep 11 - 1 month ago.
You really think that Ashes of Creation forum brings a lot of views? Or you think I care about those 61 views? Or you think the hours I spent in these two threads are worth those 61 views? If your answer is "Yes" to any of those questions, well... I don't care how old you are, but your intellectual development apparently stopped at the age of 5.
Alright, I gave it a chance and actually read all of it. Haven't learned anything I didn't know already, but the funny thing begins now.
You are obviously going to bounce and won't give an answer to this (and entertain me again by saying something unimaginably stupid), but here is the question: can you specify which part exactly was supposed to prove that my calculations are not valid?
And now, let me enjoy and see you bounce. Why? Because apparently, you thought that I would either ignore it, not understand what's written there or get overwhelmed by a couple of "scary-looking mathematical formulas". Well, guess again.
Can't wait for your answer.
Dude, I played Lineage 2 for 12+ years. You don't to "enlighten" me what PvP is, as well as tell me about a content that is generated for players by another players. Appreciate your efforts, but I'm aware that 2+2=4.
Okay, so I'll ask you the same, simple "Yes" or "No" question, alright? Shouldn't be that difficult to answer.
Based on what you said, does it mean that you suggest only taking into account the preferences of 55,6% of players who voted for the first option, while completely ignoring 44,4% of the players who voted for "90 days" and higher? Yes or No?
This part is a "fact" only in your head. Well, maybe in heads of those who can't comperehend a simple fact, that competitive advantage of hardcore players does not go away with slower or faster leveling. Average hardcore player beats average casual player under any circumstances.
I swear, I've seen batteries with more cells. I've attached the screenshot above with all those millions of views I got from the forum thread. If you somehow manage to type replies - that gives me an impression that you might be actually capable of reading. At least I assume so.
If that's the case, how come you don't see the old topic was a general question to see what people think about it?
And the second topic contains an actual suggestion with long explanation.
If you are a b... can't comprehend simple things because you are blinded by your emotions and lack of common sense - just say so.
P.S. I hereby challenge you or anyone else from this thread who dares to have a 1v1 debate. We can even invite an unbiased moderator if you want.
As I said in another thread, I want to bring up this topic prior to Alpha 2, so that if Intrepid notices it, there is a chance they will keep that in mind.
And I hope they will test leveling during Alpha 2 and/or Beta phases.
I'd like that immersive, slow cook... ~10-15 hrs of game-play per level. Make folks work for it, should be fun not an 'absolute' grind but I would enjoy quality players seeking an immersive environment over a 'Quantity' of lowbrow Nerf Herders - A longer drawn out game irritates the impatient and encourages those with a bit of patience (and personality) to be a bit more prevalent in the world. In the Golden Age of Final fantasy XI we often referenced Valkurm Dunes as the "Great Sifter," those who didn't have a degree of patience usually didn't make it past that point in the game- which ultimately made for an extremely civilized and helpful community... I want that again, I'd prefer to avoid another game that fast charges to the end where we all mash up against a gear score wall for months.
That said - due the LONG, immersive play - I would also probably hope for account shared concessions to time, like account-shared faction reputations for example so as to avoid long, repetitive grinds in the same areas with multiple characters.
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
-- T.S. Eliot
You've gone back to comments from 3 years ago, and that are about a totally different thing (Streamers, in this case).
That really is kind of creepy.
I don't even know if the rest of your post had anything worth responding to, because I got that far through and the ick was just too strong.
Warhammer online had max level 40 and renown rank lvl 100 (pvp rank). And now with the private server the max rr is 255, wich noone will ever reach.
So you did not really feel like you finished the game by any means by reaching 40. It was just one out of several progressions.
Exactly.
Exactly.
Flanker wrote a manifesto that he wants everyone to hear.
Made a video about the manifesto that he wants everybody to watch.
On the Ashen Forge he kept reading from the manifesto he had already posted here on the Forums.
And then whined that in 2+ hours of discussion on the Ashen Forge he only got through half of his manifesto and he wants to be able to finish.
Of course, because he took the time to write such an extensive manifesto, it must be perfectly solid logic (no one can give him decent counterpoints, he claims) - he knows better than game devs who created one of the most successful MMORPGs in MMORPG history and is celebrating its 25th year - after all... he's played 4 MMORPGs and read some articles and some comments on YouTube and has data from polls.
The design for Ashes already includes plenty of Leveling that takes longer than 225 hours to complete - it's just segmented in to several paths other than just Adventurer and other than just Artisan. That's a much better solution than arbitrarily slowing down the speed players can Level in just one progression path.
Additionally, Ashes provides several PvP opportunities for players before and after they reach Level 50 Adventurer.
And, yeah, same for pushing for changes in the Corruption system - we need to test the original dev vision first.