Splinter Topic: Slowing Down Different Types Of Guilds (Econ/Leveling)

Azherae wrote: »

There is one effect that long term leveling has on games like Ashes which actually does matter. Whether people consider it 'skill' or not, drastically differs, ofc.

Long leveling phases in games tuned around Food Buffs/Item Repairs, force players to have economic skills, or a type of social skills meant to replace those economic skills, to avoid slowing down.

So, whether you think it's good or bad, that this is necessary, I'm here to argue that in Ashes it is a fact that longer leveling would result in more engagement with more systems that require additional skills, and that would, itself, be moreso 'playing the game'.

This is the reason why I (possibly incorrectly) always assume that games which are meant to have serious economies and long leveling phases, will be like this, and the leveling will matter quite a lot. For this to really impact things, leveling can't be too much faster than Ashes, and I definitely understand why a lot of oldschool players would want it to be slower.

I personally just don't want it to be slower if the Economy is a certain way, because then it's not engaging or challenging. I also don't want all the Econ Challenge to be pushed to the endgame part, since I think this makes games worse in terms of retention and the 'casual v hardcore' gap.

Mag7spy wrote: »

my point is without economics increased leveling experience doesn't slow down larger (hardcore) guilds

Strikethrough text is mine, but done due to Mag's clarification in a later post.

I think this is one of the most complex parts of Ashes and affects the balances. Leveling speed, economic system, Item Repair, and PvP competition, all have to combine into some sort of 'intended experience', right? Even with the 'let's test and see what sticks' approach Intrepid sometimes has, maybe it has to 'stick' relative to a goal that we just can't fully see yet.

I think that, as Ashes is right now, Econ design + Longer leveling slows down large guilds, and gear maintenance + longer leveling slows down hardcore guilds. I also believe that the effects of both these things do the correct (intended?) thing of making Nodes important, either for guilds, or in general for guildless players, because a good Node is the way to 'push back against the limiter'.

So as an obviously econ biased player, I'm against quick leveling because I think it would advantage Large and Hardcore Guilds unnecessarily and diminish the Node system.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Azherae

Mag7spy wrote: »

Myosotys wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

I personally just don't want it to be slower if the Economy is a certain way, because then it's not engaging or challenging. I also don't want all the Econ Challenge to be pushed to the endgame part, since I think this makes games worse in terms of retention and the 'casual v hardcore' gap.

I can't agree more on that. I'm also fine with a fast leveling if the economy is running well. But in the state of available information, I do not see how the value of items of different levels can be preserved.

Apart from the economic aspect, I see the slow leveling as a major PvP challenge. In my opinion, slowing down enemy guilds is a fundamental point in an MMO with a strong PvP component.

You can slow down a strong guild you just create a bigger difference between hardcore guilds and less hardcore guilds.

So, Mag, back to this.

I don't think you can meaningfully slow down a strong guild at all, almost by definition. When I say 'slow down' I mean 'relative to everyone else competing'.

So I don't see how this works in your mind. What have you experienced that 'slows down a strong guild' but also increases the gap between hardcore and less hardcore guilds? (I hope it's ok to assume you meant that one causes the other and that the gap gets bigger, because I can't find another way to interpret your sentence).

Mag7spy

My point was mainly about leveling and not really economics, to make it more clear a hardcore guild playing a lot are going to get a lot more resources / xp / etc. You can make higher materials more rare / expensive but that also impacts all other guilds / groups under them as well.

That is not saying you can't slow down guilds with that kind of stuff though, but it have to be in a focused way around the type of content they do to add some form of sink. IE Castle sieges and building defensive or other elements could be used as a sink that technically can slow them down since they have to dedicate time to getting resources and materials for it. Without impacting other casual - mid guilds that aren't doing that kind of content yet or such.

I do agree fast leveling shouldn't be a thing but i guess there as to be a point on what we consider to be fast leveling. I me if it takes a good average player 2 months to get max level that is pretty good. But since there is other traits to player growth besides just leveling time would have to be dedicated to that I'd expect slowing down the leveling process further for all players to advance in their artisan / gathering levels.

But to me there still needs to be a balance as too slow isn't a good thing as it creates a larger barrier to entry for people to be competitive. Which I've really only talked about with leveling since imo that is the most fair one. With other growth in artisan for example should be an even longer journey.

Long story short though i do agree you can slow down hardcore guilds with economics. Has to be balanced out though of course.

#edit also I'm going to bed

Azherae

I got it now.

Difference in experience again. Games I enjoy, you can't come out of leveling process in the black. Old super-hardcore games (apparently) you have to stop leveling to farm, or you can't afford new gear.

I'm very explicitly saying here 'if you tried to make it using only the money you got from killing things in your EXP parties, you would not even be able to afford proper gear' back then.

Intrepid, I understand that this is too hardcore for some people these days, and obviously I biasedly think that if you want a decent economy you have to implement this much and pray it doesn't cause players to hate your game.

But if you are planning to balance so that a player can afford reasonable gear by 'just grinding mobs or doing quests' (in the latter case, therefore not having to compete on sales) please do not bother making leveling long, I don't think it would achieve any feelings of dedication or achievement.

I don't know if any modern game even could or should try to do one of these things without the other, but in terms of Guilds I feel like I know what the effect would be.

"When leveling supports itself, hardcore-time guilds automatically win, and larger 'zerglike' guilds come in a close second, with smaller guilds that contain or rely on crafters at a distant third."

JamesSunderland

Leveling speed means nothing here. The only way to truly "slow down" a "strong hardcore guild" is using content/resource denial through competition, which in the day is an "economical attack" and no, i don't think there is a reasonable way for a "less hardcore guild" to do such a thing, but an alliance of "less hardcore guild" might be able to it through numeric advantages.

Azherae

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Leveling speed means nothing here. The only way to truly "slow down" a "strong hardcore guild" is using content/resource denial through competition, which in the day is an "economical attack" and no, i don't think there is a reasonable way for a "less hardcore guild" to do such a thing, but an alliance of "less hardcore guild" might be able to it through numeric advantages.

Well, in certain builds the two are related.

If your sword wears out after 3 full exp parties and isn't super easy to just repair, and you only gained 1.5-2 levels (I'm thinking toward the 34-44 level range for example), you have to bother to repair it, at least.

If leveling is fast enough that you can clear the entire 'level gap' between your Level 35 sword and your level 45 sword without the sword wearing out, then 'the leveling speed' is 'the thing making you more resistant to being slowed economically'.

I'd say 'Intrepid can just balance the two things around each other' but I don't think anyone wants to have to repair their main weapon more than once per session, right?

'Casuals' could do it on their offday/longplay sessions, 'hardcore' players have time to repair it whenever.

JamesSunderland

Azherae wrote: »

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Leveling speed means nothing here. The only way to truly "slow down" a "strong hardcore guild" is using content/resource denial through competition, which in the day is an "economical attack" and no, i don't think there is a reasonable way for a "less hardcore guild" to do such a thing, but an alliance of "less hardcore guild" might be able to it through numeric advantages.

Well, in certain builds the two are related.

If your sword wears out after 3 full exp parties and isn't super easy to just repair, and you only gained 1.5-2 levels (I'm thinking toward the 34-44 level range for example), you have to bother to repair it, at least.

If leveling is fast enough that you can clear the entire 'level gap' between your Level 35 sword and your level 45 sword without the sword wearing out, then 'the leveling speed' is 'the thing making you more resistant to being slowed economically'.

I'd say 'Intrepid can just balance the two things around each other' but I don't think anyone wants to have to repair their main weapon more than once per session, right?

'Casuals' could do it on their offday/longplay sessions, 'hardcore' players have time to repair it whenever.

I understand the reasoning, but that would need to take things like secundary weapons/less optimal weapons/burn weapons/weapons drop rates/difficulty of crafting of the weapon and efficiency of the usage of weapons in consideration.

Ludullu

To me this kinda ties back to mob loot tables and grinds, in the context of mob difficulty.

A hardcore guild would probably want to fight upwards, in order to lvl up faster. If mobs are difficult - fighting upwards means a better gear requirement and a higher decay on said gear. If drop rates on mats are low, the hardcore guild simply can't fight upwards, because not all members have the proper gear (or mats for repairs are not abundant enough). This means that leveling is slower for them, because they gotta use weaker gear or fight weaker mobs.

And usage of weaker gear ties to what James said. Alliances of weaker guilds can now have a higher chance of opposing these hardcore guilds (that is if the skill is anywhere near equal).

And if the gear power scaling and acquisition pyramid (i.e. the amount of sources of gear decreasing the higher the tier) are balanced well - you have yourself a game where the gap between hardcores and less-hardcore groups is not AS big, though it would still be kinda big cause that's inevitable.

PavlovDead

I certainly hope leveling isn't a protracted experience, largely because I'm in the "leveling as extended tutorial" camp. The "end game" in a given game is almost always a matter of having both level cap and high end gear, but what percentage of time is spent on one vs another depends on the game. I tend to support a higher percentage of this effort being placed on gear because the primary thing that is gated by levels is build completion.

Effectively, you can't even start experimenting with and practicing your completed character build until you have the full number of skill points to bring it together. Supposedly every archetype is going to have 8 sub-classes, and each sub-class appears to have multiple ways to build. That implies there could be a lot of build diversity among players, and letting them experiment with this relatively early can be important.

There are few things worse in an MMO than spending 2 months leveling a character, only to realize you don't actually like how that class plays when it's complete. It feels like you've wasted your time, and the prospect of having to spend another two months to fix it is a good way to sap player enthusiasm.

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

To me this kinda ties back to mob loot tables and grinds, in the context of mob difficulty.

A hardcore guild would probably want to fight upwards, in order to lvl up faster. If mobs are difficult - fighting upwards means a better gear requirement and a higher decay on said gear. If drop rates on mats are low, the hardcore guild simply can't fight upwards, because not all members have the proper gear (or mats for repairs are not abundant enough). This means that leveling is slower for them, because they gotta use weaker gear or fight weaker mobs.

And usage of weaker gear ties to what James said. Alliances of weaker guilds can now have a higher chance of opposing these hardcore guilds (that is if the skill is anywhere near equal).

And if the gear power scaling and acquisition pyramid (i.e. the amount of sources of gear decreasing the higher the tier) are balanced well - you have yourself a game where the gap between hardcores and less-hardcore groups is not AS big, though it would still be kinda big cause that's inevitable.

The thing is if we are talking about being optimal hardcore guilds do that most optimal thing they can find. If fighting harder mobs is not so they will do mid level.

Not to mention if you are making gear harder to repair and such that effects all players not just hardcore even if it is skewed to affect hardcore more since they are a bit ahead. The best way to do it is look at what elements of content hardcore players are doing IE siege and have that be more resource heavy. That way you are creating a sink that is only effect their loop of gameplay without affecting other people as much.

Mag7spy

PavlovDead wrote: »

I certainly hope leveling isn't a protracted experience, largely because I'm in the "leveling as extended tutorial" camp. The "end game" in a given game is almost always a matter of having both level cap and high end gear, but what percentage of time is spent on one vs another depends on the game. I tend to support a higher percentage of this effort being placed on gear because the primary thing that is gated by levels is build completion.

Effectively, you can't even start experimenting with and practicing your completed character build until you have the full number of skill points to bring it together. Supposedly every archetype is going to have 8 sub-classes, and each sub-class appears to have multiple ways to build. That implies there could be a lot of build diversity among players, and letting them experiment with this relatively early can be important.

There are few things worse in an MMO than spending 2 months leveling a character, only to realize you don't actually like how that class plays when it's complete. It feels like you've wasted your time, and the prospect of having to spend another two months to fix it is a good way to sap player enthusiasm.

That is what i mentioned in another thread about tool sets and content. Hard content is more advanced and fun since you have your full kit and devs can plan for that. Where lower level content you can just out level it and its difficulty doesn't plan for you to have ally our tools.

There goal is 45 days to level and lvling isn't the only progression for a player. So I'd imagine a good casual player will most likely hit max lvl after 2 months, and hardcore players hitting max lvl after a month roughly. Node progression acting as some gate to cap hardcore players from leveling at the most optimal speed. But who knows what might change in testing lol

Myosotys

PavlovDead wrote: »

I certainly hope leveling isn't a protracted experience, largely because I'm in the "leveling as extended tutorial" camp. The "end game" in a given game is almost always a matter of having both level cap and high end gear, but what percentage of time is spent on one vs another depends on the game. I tend to support a higher percentage of this effort being placed on gear because the primary thing that is gated by levels is build completion.

Effectively, you can't even start experimenting with and practicing your completed character build until you have the full number of skill points to bring it together. Supposedly every archetype is going to have 8 sub-classes, and each sub-class appears to have multiple ways to build. That implies there could be a lot of build diversity among players, and letting them experiment with this relatively early can be important.

There are few things worse in an MMO than spending 2 months leveling a character, only to realize you don't actually like how that class plays when it's complete. It feels like you've wasted your time, and the prospect of having to spend another two months to fix it is a good way to sap player enthusiasm.

In answer to your issue, we could get everyone to agree on a good balance of exponentiality of leveling.
45 days to go from level 1 to 40. And another 45 days to go from level 41 to 50.
If you don't like your level 40 character, you won't like more at level 50...

But if I find that your argument is not very solid because you also need good gear to really test a character and you agree to spend more time on the gear.

Ludullu

Mag7spy wrote: »

The thing is if we are talking about being optimal hardcore guilds do that most optimal thing they can find. If fighting harder mobs is not so they will do mid level.

Which is exactly my point. Hardcore guilds would have to do weaker content, which slows down their progress, puts them more at odds with weaker guild alliances (which slows them down even more) and lets those alliances catch up faster.

Mag7spy wrote: »

Not to mention if you are making gear harder to repair and such that effects all players not just hardcore even if it is skewed to affect hardcore more since they are a bit ahead.

This is why I said that the pyramid would need to be balanced properly. The weaker players would have an easier time than the hardcore ones, but it still wouldn't prevent hardcore players from overpowering their opponents.

Mag7spy wrote: »

The best way to do it is look at what elements of content hardcore players are doing IE siege and have that be more resource heavy. That way you are creating a sink that is only effect their loop of gameplay without affecting other people as much.

We discussed this before. I would prefer if sieges were more open to other people, so this wouldn't really be a good solution imo.

Also, I'd expect sieges to be more about low tier mats an resources in huge quantities, rather than smth that would directly affect hardcore guild progress/power.

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

The thing is if we are talking about being optimal hardcore guilds do that most optimal thing they can find. If fighting harder mobs is not so they will do mid level.

Which is exactly my point. Hardcore guilds would have to do weaker content, which slows down their progress, puts them more at odds with weaker guild alliances (which slows them down even more) and lets those alliances catch up faster.

Mag7spy wrote: »

Not to mention if you are making gear harder to repair and such that effects all players not just hardcore even if it is skewed to affect hardcore more since they are a bit ahead.

This is why I said that the pyramid would need to be balanced properly. The weaker players would have an easier time than the hardcore ones, but it still wouldn't prevent hardcore players from overpowering their opponents.

Mag7spy wrote: »

The best way to do it is look at what elements of content hardcore players are doing IE siege and have that be more resource heavy. That way you are creating a sink that is only effect their loop of gameplay without affecting other people as much.

We discussed this before. I would prefer if sieges were more open to other people, so this wouldn't really be a good solution imo.

Also, I'd expect sieges to be more about low tier mats an resources in huge quantities, rather than smth that would directly affect hardcore guild progress/power.

I thinking you missed what i meant here, if weaker content gets faster xp they will do that, that isn't something that is really slowing them down. If we are talking about hard / soft caps based on level that is a different story though.

We shouldn't really have our views on number of people in sieges in this disccusion it really doesn't have anything to do with it. Hardcore guilds leading sieges and pushing for them is where you have sinks that can be placed. Placing sinks around content hardcore players are pushing for that are competitive is one key way of doing it.

This isn't saying casual players or any other can't help with it. But true hardcore guilds aren't going to have casual member so that means all those hardcore members will have to contribute and spend time doing it (ie to hold their castle)

PavlovDead

Myosotys wrote: »

PavlovDead wrote: »

I certainly hope leveling isn't a protracted experience, largely because I'm in the "leveling as extended tutorial" camp. The "end game" in a given game is almost always a matter of having both level cap and high end gear, but what percentage of time is spent on one vs another depends on the game. I tend to support a higher percentage of this effort being placed on gear because the primary thing that is gated by levels is build completion.

Effectively, you can't even start experimenting with and practicing your completed character build until you have the full number of skill points to bring it together. Supposedly every archetype is going to have 8 sub-classes, and each sub-class appears to have multiple ways to build. That implies there could be a lot of build diversity among players, and letting them experiment with this relatively early can be important.

There are few things worse in an MMO than spending 2 months leveling a character, only to realize you don't actually like how that class plays when it's complete. It feels like you've wasted your time, and the prospect of having to spend another two months to fix it is a good way to sap player enthusiasm.

In answer to your issue, we could get everyone to agree on a good balance of exponentiality of leveling.
45 days to go from level 1 to 40. And another 45 days to go from level 41 to 50.
If you don't like your level 40 character, you won't like more at level 50...

But if I find that your argument is not very solid because you also need good gear to really test a character and you agree to spend more time on the gear.

I think I would have to disagree. Good gear is required to test your build against tough enemies, but so long as you have all of your skills available, you can still test your full set of mechanics against weaker ones.

It's not necessarily true that a player will know how they feel about their class before level cap. Sometimes a class is really held together by a skill they get late into the tree. It's also easy to plan out your build at level 1 only to realize it doesn't fit together how you wanted when you get there. Letting players get their skill points relatively quickly makes this process a lot more painless.

Myosotys

PavlovDead wrote: »

Myosotys wrote: »

PavlovDead wrote: »

I certainly hope leveling isn't a protracted experience, largely because I'm in the "leveling as extended tutorial" camp. The "end game" in a given game is almost always a matter of having both level cap and high end gear, but what percentage of time is spent on one vs another depends on the game. I tend to support a higher percentage of this effort being placed on gear because the primary thing that is gated by levels is build completion.

Effectively, you can't even start experimenting with and practicing your completed character build until you have the full number of skill points to bring it together. Supposedly every archetype is going to have 8 sub-classes, and each sub-class appears to have multiple ways to build. That implies there could be a lot of build diversity among players, and letting them experiment with this relatively early can be important.

There are few things worse in an MMO than spending 2 months leveling a character, only to realize you don't actually like how that class plays when it's complete. It feels like you've wasted your time, and the prospect of having to spend another two months to fix it is a good way to sap player enthusiasm.

In answer to your issue, we could get everyone to agree on a good balance of exponentiality of leveling.
45 days to go from level 1 to 40. And another 45 days to go from level 41 to 50.
If you don't like your level 40 character, you won't like more at level 50...

But if I find that your argument is not very solid because you also need good gear to really test a character and you agree to spend more time on the gear.

It's not necessarily true that a player will know how they feel about their class before level cap.

It's not necessarily wrong neither... It's a very subjective point of view. Some players understand from level 20 that a class is not made for them. Others at level 50.

Especially since the level cap will certainly be increased if we are to believe the rhetoric used "The level cap at launch is expected to be level 50"

PavlovDead wrote: »

Letting players get their skill points relatively quickly makes this process a lot more painless.

This ties in with what I've said in several other topics.There is a popular misconception that the game is only fun from the max level and that going up to the max level is painful. But if the content of the game is well balanced, there should not be an essential need to reach max level to enjoy the game.

In any case, that's what I hope for the game's economy and for the accent on skill instead of level. In a PvP game, we expect a significant effort from the devs on combat mechanics which require a certain level of skill. As a result, a competent level 40 player will certainly be able to kill a less competent level 50 player.

This is how I except to be, maybe it will not be like that.

Azherae

The problem here, Mag, is that we're talking about Ashes of Creation.

Not 'FFXI+L2' that I wish we were talking about, not 'Enhanced L2' that NiKr might want to see, not whatever you wish to see.

We have to talk about it in the way that NiKr does because we're talking only about leveling, it's a branch from a leveling speed thread after all.

Hardcore guilds aren't going to be sieging consistently before Max level. Intrepid themselves indicated that for whatever reasons, we aren't even likely to see many sieges before those players reach max level, and even if they try to make it more 'sensible', people these days are conditioned to race to max level, the best they can do is make it a noob trap (or actually go the FFXI route and make it so there is NO content available to level on until Nodes are up, but that will just turn into a BDO 'quest from 59 to 60' thing AND break the Node map).

The same goes for gear materials and repairs. Hardcore guilds function largely by having and supporting 'lackey crafters' (they don't have to really be lackeys, but you get the idea). If just 'leveling crafting' is enough to kit out the people rushing to max level, that's optimal. If the resource scarcity isn't slowing down the crafters too, it won't work.

I'm not saying they can't do this, I'm saying I can't work out how to tie together everything they've said into one cohesive thing, unless the game's PvE is basically not actually challenging below max level after the crafters are up to speed.

This makes for an even more top-heavy game than L2, which I'm definitely against, but again, this is just my speculation.

"There's no reason for a hardcore guild to do anything but boost their crafters and have those crafters never leave Node, their gatherers go full locust on the environment, while no-lifing the max level race so they can get the first Freeholds."

Percimes

One way to slow down hardcore players, at least relatively to the more casual players, is to "force" them to carry the slow ones. Have most advancements tied to a communal goal which unlock "rewards" to all members. AoC does to do this in part with content being linked to node progressions, but the more dedicated players/guilds have a few ways out to, if not escape, at least diminish this burden.

I didn't play it at the time, but the way some of my friends who did explained it to me, that's more or less what Shadowbane was doing.

I don't think cranking this approach to 11 would fit into AoC since "welfare rewards" pretty much goes against the risks vs. rewards pillar, but the more personal progression is accessible through a node, the more all the players will have to push that node progression. The hardcore would do it anyway, so at least the more casuals wouldn't be left too far in the dust.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

Hardcore guilds aren't going to be sieging consistently before Max level. Intrepid themselves indicated that for whatever reasons, we aren't even likely to see many sieges before those players reach max level, and even if they try to make it more 'sensible', people these days are conditioned to race to max level, the best they can do is make it a noob trap (or actually go the FFXI route and make it so there is NO content available to level on until Nodes are up, but that will just turn into a BDO 'quest from 59 to 60' thing AND break the Node map).

This brings up a good question, that I gonna use for the next q&a.

What lvl are the mobs in unoccupied castles? Cause if they're lvl50 - hardcore guilds will simply be unable to even siege before max lvl.

L2's "optimal" progress for a guild on a new server was definitely attempting to get a castle asap, because it meant a ton of money inflow. So far it seems that Ashes might be in the same spot, unless mobs are lvl50 there.

I agree that people are conditioned to race to the max lvl, but of that's not optimal - the guilds who ultimately win will be the ones who did things optimally.

Mag7spy

Azherae wrote: »

The problem here, Mag, is that we're talking about Ashes of Creation.

Not 'FFXI+L2' that I wish we were talking about, not 'Enhanced L2' that NiKr might want to see, not whatever you wish to see.

We have to talk about it in the way that NiKr does because we're talking only about leveling, it's a branch from a leveling speed thread after all.

Hardcore guilds aren't going to be sieging consistently before Max level. Intrepid themselves indicated that for whatever reasons, we aren't even likely to see many sieges before those players reach max level, and even if they try to make it more 'sensible', people these days are conditioned to race to max level, the best they can do is make it a noob trap (or actually go the FFXI route and make it so there is NO content available to level on until Nodes are up, but that will just turn into a BDO 'quest from 59 to 60' thing AND break the Node map).

The same goes for gear materials and repairs. Hardcore guilds function largely by having and supporting 'lackey crafters' (they don't have to really be lackeys, but you get the idea). If just 'leveling crafting' is enough to kit out the people rushing to max level, that's optimal. If the resource scarcity isn't slowing down the crafters too, it won't work.

I'm not saying they can't do this, I'm saying I can't work out how to tie together everything they've said into one cohesive thing, unless the game's PvE is basically not actually challenging below max level after the crafters are up to speed.

This makes for an even more top-heavy game than L2, which I'm definitely against, but again, this is just my speculation.

"There's no reason for a hardcore guild to do anything but boost their crafters and have those crafters never leave Node, their gatherers go full locust on the environment, while no-lifing the max level race so they can get the first Freeholds."

Honestly I'm unsure how you stop people feeding them mats to level up all there stuff fast since we have free trade in AoC. Unless you do the mobile kind of gate where they can only progress so fast per day.

Node siege this was an example you can still take any hardcore feature these types of groups will be doing and having a reason to have more cost sink into it. I'm sure there has to be some activities aimed towards hardcore players.

Azherae

Mag7spy wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

The problem here, Mag, is that we're talking about Ashes of Creation.

Not 'FFXI+L2' that I wish we were talking about, not 'Enhanced L2' that NiKr might want to see, not whatever you wish to see.

We have to talk about it in the way that NiKr does because we're talking only about leveling, it's a branch from a leveling speed thread after all.

Hardcore guilds aren't going to be sieging consistently before Max level. Intrepid themselves indicated that for whatever reasons, we aren't even likely to see many sieges before those players reach max level, and even if they try to make it more 'sensible', people these days are conditioned to race to max level, the best they can do is make it a noob trap (or actually go the FFXI route and make it so there is NO content available to level on until Nodes are up, but that will just turn into a BDO 'quest from 59 to 60' thing AND break the Node map).

The same goes for gear materials and repairs. Hardcore guilds function largely by having and supporting 'lackey crafters' (they don't have to really be lackeys, but you get the idea). If just 'leveling crafting' is enough to kit out the people rushing to max level, that's optimal. If the resource scarcity isn't slowing down the crafters too, it won't work.

I'm not saying they can't do this, I'm saying I can't work out how to tie together everything they've said into one cohesive thing, unless the game's PvE is basically not actually challenging below max level after the crafters are up to speed.

This makes for an even more top-heavy game than L2, which I'm definitely against, but again, this is just my speculation.

"There's no reason for a hardcore guild to do anything but boost their crafters and have those crafters never leave Node, their gatherers go full locust on the environment, while no-lifing the max level race so they can get the first Freeholds."

Honestly I'm unsure how you stop people feeding them mats to level up all there stuff fast since we have free trade in AoC. Unless you do the mobile kind of gate where they can only progress so fast per day.

Node siege this was an example you can still take any hardcore feature these types of groups will be doing and having a reason to have more cost sink into it. I'm sure there has to be some activities aimed towards hardcore players.

Well, can you suggest any? I genuinely can't think of anything other than leveling and crafting that Hardcore players would be doing in Ashes, that would make those people sit back and think 'hey this race to max level is inefficient, I should slow down and try to go do X'.

Maybe capturing mounts, I guess?

I feel like the games I play solved this 'accidentally' maybe. But then again, there's obviously true OG multiplayer concepts from even before Y2K, so maybe it was moreso 'based on those' than 'accidental'.

Anyways, basically the only thing I know that is 'aimed at hardcore players' pre max level... is leveling, and it's been that way since 2009 at least, in my experience...

Child Item