Node Advancement

TheHiddenDaggerInn

Lately I've been thinking about Leveling in general with my thoughts of character leveling might be too fast, Node advancement might be as well.
From what we know a Village or Stage 3 will take a few days to level up.

What is this timetable based off of? so a node right next to the starting portal that will be flooded with players will still level up at the same rate as another node nearby with less players?

I would have to believe it's a culmination of all the experience that is being put into it, that being said these time tables might be very skewed.

Which brings me to my next point, that IMO if you're near another node and perhaps they started that one a bit earlier, but you want to surpass them and be the main node, you will look to attack them as soon as you can. Why would you wait for them to become a Metropolis and have a battle of Epic proportions and the same type of effort to siege it that went into building it, when you can bring it to it's knees right now!

Initially Steven said 6 years ago on a Dungeon Crawler network podcast sieging would give them 1-2 days to prepare, now the time table has now been moved to 3 days for a Village. So for a village to advance to Town, it takes many days, which would be less than a week or otherwise just say a week.

So let's assume it takes 6 days to reach town level, Now being their are only 5 Metro's allowed on the map, it's safe to assume there will be plenty of nodes vying for a better spot in the rotation, possibly they had a late arriving alliance or whatever.

Basically as I understand it only 1 node will get a shot at the top dog near them, if you fail, they're protected for 30 days! So no one else would get a opportunity to take them down. Either the time to level the node is too fast or the time for another siege is way to long. So if Node C and Node E both are working on their own city but not together, but they both want Node A to regress so they can pass them, if Node C beats them to the Siege Scroll and sucks up the day with a unorganized attempt at a siege then no other node will have a chance before the progress.

Not only that but after then win, since protected for 30 days they will have smooth sailing to a town (which is assuming 6 days or so, and a City which is a few weeks. So in theory the could leap frog from Village to city (which will have considerably more defensive capabilities).

I would like it to be more of a achievement to get to that stage 6, really prove your worth to the lands around you, that you deserver the top spot!, Not just because you had every noob in the area help you with experience., because they had no idea where to go.

This of course will be tested in Alpha 2, but when we get there, think long term and what your guild would do if put in this situation. Now we can always annoy them with monster Coins, declare war on the node, and the guilds running it, and harvest every bit of materials within that area to make them suffer. Will it be enough to stop them , while trying to level your own nodes.

Would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this, if you're only going to say wait for alpha 2, just don't bother to comment that. This is something that will have a profound imprint on the game and their are a metric ton of guilds out there all vying to have a Metropolis, so how are you going to deal with someone who you might want to take out? Move and set yourself farther back, I think not.

tautau

You speak of nodes as though they had consciousness, "You (the node) want to surpass them and be the main node" and "...why would you (the node) wait for them to become a metro...". But a node isn't an entity that makes its own decisions any more than Chicago or Dublin makes decisions.

Additionally, even if there is a guild in a node trying to advance it, a guild is insufficient to do so by itself. Citizens of a guild certainly might want to advance that node, but it is unlikely that they will work with one purpose and speak with one voice. We players are such a contentious and uncooperative type!

I think that it is more likely that macro influences, many of them economic in nature, will be the main determinates of node advancement. Is it a costal node where trade routes will easily reach nodes on the other continent? Is it located near a player starting point? Does its area contain resources that are in high demand? If it is remote, like in the far north or south, no amount of citizen/guild determination is likely to make it an early metro contender. Which of the types of nodes turn out to be more popular? How much of an influence will the scenery and beauty of the node area turn out to have?

As you mentioned in your last paragraph that you would love to have others' thoughts on your post...here are mine. As always, I may be off track.

Ludullu

ILLPeonU wrote: »

if you're only going to say wait for alpha 2, just don't bother to comment that

But I mainly say that because I got no opinion either way, due to having no tangible info on what I'd prefer. Though I do think that 21 fucking day lockout on sieges after level up is kinda silly as hell. So, if anything, I'd probably prefer that part of the system to be gone. And everything else will be tested.

Chonkers1

There should be zero lockouts from sieges due to node progression
Node progression should rely on resources, time gating is something that should not be overdone
Time gating for node could variate with quality of resources and if extra resources are invested node time gating progression could speed up

Azherae

I have too many opinions on this due to other games, but I'll say that I don't think the numbers Intrepid gives are either terrible or useless.

Plus, we don't know how many Monster Coin events or similar things affect it.

Also, I don't feel that players have too much reason to race their Node to the top in the same way that you mention. If you want your node to rise faster, convince other people to come to it first. If you're locked out due to 'second place', there's probably a way to resolve it.

But I admit that with all we know now (basically nothing) there isn't any obvious one.

arsnn

I agree the timeframe of the node siege lockout in the context of how fast people can level up a node doesnt make any sense.

TheHiddenDaggerInn

I’m ok with like a day to recover but more than that, no way. If you’re another node and you want your shot, and you saw another node just took a shot to the head you take that opportunity to finish them. Again, prove your node should be one of the best!

TheHiddenDaggerInn

tautau wrote: »

You speak of nodes as though they had consciousness, "You (the node) want to surpass them and be the main node" and "...why would you (the node) wait for them to become a metro...". But a node isn't an entity that makes its own decisions any more than Chicago or Dublin makes decisions.

Additionally, even if there is a guild in a node trying to advance it, a guild is insufficient to do so by itself. Citizens of a guild certainly might want to advance that node, but it is unlikely that they will work with one purpose and speak with one voice. We players are such a contentious and uncooperative type!

I think that it is more likely that macro influences, many of them economic in nature, will be the main determinates of node advancement. Is it a costal node where trade routes will easily reach nodes on the other continent? Is it located near a player starting point? Does its area contain resources that are in high demand? If it is remote, like in the far north or south, no amount of citizen/guild determination is likely to make it an early metro contender. Which of the types of nodes turn out to be more popular? How much of an influence will the scenery and beauty of the node area turn out to have?

As you mentioned in your last paragraph that you would love to have others' thoughts on your post...here are mine. As always, I may be off track.

What I mean by those terms are simply, alliances that will have area's already planned out on launch will put in the collective effort, and many citizens will see what's going on as well and want to possibly contribute to try and be a powerful node.

Being able to level your node to the top first has many benefits, naming 1 would simply be people who bought housing early would be greatly rewarded if they were to succeed in defending it time and time again. As opposed to a person ran in there quick and bought a plot from a loan of his buddies. His friends would know that might not be a great investment, because it anytime it could be sieged and would bring a element of real thought before buying a home in a node.

This game I believe will bring community back to games, and these Nodes will be the common drivers of it, Are you going to want to be in a Smart car for a node? or a Lamborghini.

The strong survive, if that node that has a early exp advantage is worthy then they should have no problem fending off aggressors. People have fought over land since the beginning of time, and this game will be no different. Don't gate me please!

Azherae

ILLPeonU wrote: »

I’m ok with like a day to recover but more than that, no way. If you’re another node and you want your shot, and you saw another node just took a shot to the head you take that opportunity to finish them. Again, prove your node should be one of the best!

I feel like this doesn't work that way.

Elite handles this entirely differently though (influence percentages) so I'm biased.

I can say that I'm against 'just being able to attack a node right after it was attacked' in that straightforward way, but I don't really have a suggestion since I don't see a good way for Ashes to use any of the three ways I am familiar with.

TheHiddenDaggerInn

Azherae wrote: »

ILLPeonU wrote: »

I’m ok with like a day to recover but more than that, no way. If you’re another node and you want your shot, and you saw another node just took a shot to the head you take that opportunity to finish them. Again, prove your node should be one of the best!

I feel like this doesn't work that way.

Elite handles this entirely differently though (influence percentages) so I'm biased.

I can say that I'm against 'just being able to attack a node right after it was attacked' in that straightforward way, but I don't really have a suggestion since I don't see a good way for Ashes to use any of the three ways I am familiar with.

Ya we will have to see fully how well the system works in Alpha 2, and don't get me wrong I don't think it should be fight off someone , then later that day another one. A little downtime to get set up again and prepare is not to much to ask IF they've successfully defended a attack already.

tautau

Regarding length of time before a node can be sieged, there is a one-week cooldown after a node reaches level 3, then a one-week election process. The new mayor will then have one week to get things organized prior to the attack, if I read this correctly:

"Once a node has reached Village (stage 3) there will be a one week cooldown period before node elections begin.[65]

This cooldown period allows players to establish citizenship at the village; which may require them to relinquish previous citizenship at another node.[65]
Following the initial cooldown, there will be a one week election process, then from that point on, elections will follow a monthly cadence.[65]
Node sieges may not be declared for 21 days following a node advancing to any stage.[66]
This was previously stated to apply only to nodes advancing to Village (stage 3), not higher stages.[67]"

TheHiddenDaggerInn

If a node can’t be declared on for 21 days then that system is broken, that’s basically saying we have to wait for a city or metro to attack .which would be absurd

tautau

Note also the information about obtaining a siege scroll at: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Node_siege_declaration

In particular the line: "Sieging will require a similar amount of resources and time to what it took to develop the node being sieged.[13]"

We don't know how much effort goes into advancing a node, apart from knowing that it will be a LOT, lots of quests, commissions, gathering and other player activity. To get a siege scroll to attack a level 5 or 6 node, the attackers might have to put in weeks or months of effort, depending on how many are working on obtaining the scroll - though this is conjecture on my part. Also, if the players are spending their time on getting a siege scroll, that means that they are NOT spending their time doing other things, like advancing their own node, attacking castles, and so forth.

It seems to me that a siege will be a big deal, not a routine occurrence.

Azherae

ILLPeonU wrote: »

If a node can’t be declared on for 21 days then that system is broken, that’s basically saying we have to wait for a city or metro to attack .which would be absurd

It's not that long though, if you assume that the amount of work required to get the siege declaration is a large amount.

We also don't know exactly what it means to 'put in the work'. Is it work gathering siege weapons? Is it work 'politically campaigning against the actions of the Node you want to siege'?

I said that it can't work exactly like Elite or similar, but I didn't mean 'assume it is just some disconnected system'. All I meant was that a single node wouldn't necessarily have different factions in it, but maybe a single ZOI does.

Basically, if the 'work required' to be allowed to Siege Node A can include 'noncitizens getting a bunch of overflow XP for Node B'.

I don't think they're going to let us override their protections this way, though, since the whole point is to have some stability. Node Sieges aren't meant to be 'standard content'. The fact that they made the cooldowns longer tells us that. There's probably some other activity related to that.

Ludullu

Right now the only semi-logical reasoning behind the current design I can see is "we want the start of the server to be stable and with limited pvp". The nodes grow w/o a single siege, the "factions" get established and people get to farm up and gear up.

And then all these factions start deciding who they want to take down or what they want to change in the world.

My main issue is with seeing what exactly would make those factions go to the length of actually sieging a node in a completely different location of the world. But I doubt we'll learn that before A2. Obviously there's "that location might have different content if we change it", but to me that sounds like a very very weak reasoning, considering how seemingly expensive and difficult a siege is supposed to be.

TheHiddenDaggerInn

They should start with very few restrictions and implement more if they feel it’s needed. Supposed to be a world run by players, let us run it! Not time gates

Azherae

ILLPeonU wrote: »

They should start with very few restrictions and implement more if they feel it’s needed. Supposed to be a world run by players, let us run it! Not time gates

Nope, this right here is the biggest error when making this game time and I definitely don't want to see it in Ashes.

We're simulating 'places', 'lives', and 'stability', but leaving out things like 'recovery/sleep', 'distance logistics', and 'disease'.

I'm not saying the game needs to have those things, but I am saying that if we're accepting 'yeah if you die in the siege it's fine you can come back and loot the place in an hour or so', then we should also accept 'if you lose the siege there's magical anti-siege protection for a while now'.

Morashtak

This is going to be fun to discover during Alpha 2 and beyond - What players actions and interactions did the devs not take into account when they originally envisioned the node system?

While I'll still pretend to be part Skyrim horse and find all the exploitable terrain (and report it, of course), another large amount of my time will be giving feedback on the time and player actions combination that makes node development feel mostly player-driven rather than forced by the system.

A minimum time would prevent node zerging, but if players are too hamstrung by the calendar it'll feel more like ESO (as mentioned above) and less a player-driven game. A good mix is essential.

Aszkalon

" Me wants it. Me wants to see Footage. Presentations. Me wants to see how a Node progresses and looks amazing. "

These here are Artworks from very skilled seeming Artists on Deviantart. Oh, what a Joy. Can't wait. ^^






When i haven't a completely wrong Estimation - and i hope i am right - a Metropolis will be about THIS Size, now won't it ?
I imagine a Village-kind of Node fitting into the Offshoots around the Center of a Metropolis easily like Five to Six Times. A Metropolis should look really huge and intimidating compared to smaller Nodes. . 😁

" Me wants it ! " (lol) " My Footage ... ... ... my p~rrr~eciousss ... ... "

TheHiddenDaggerInn

Have they said whether the nodes will still be able to be attacked by monster coins while in the 21 day protection?

Aszkalon

ILLPeonU wrote: »

Have they said whether the nodes will still be able to be attacked by monster coins while in the 21 day protection?

To be fair - > solely for the Purpose of more possible Action and Liveliness inside the daily Game, i would be completely fine with it.

And it would feel more realistic as well. Because neither is time waiting for Anyone, nor do Monster Hordes.