Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
*How do you feel about the Node Wars Preview?
As a demonstration, it’s very good to me.
*What excites you about playing and interacting with the Node Wars system?
I’m the type of like doing things or say co-op with friends or random players in MMO or online games. No matter it’s a PVE/PVP content or I need the rewards or not. I play games for experience, connect/social to other people, make friends and for fun. What I need is different and fun activities/events/objectives/battlegrounds in Node Wars.
*Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
I concerned about node wars happen too much or too few. So to me I really looking forwards that some nodes are controlled by developers and the frequency of most activities are more stable and not go extreme much or few around those nodes than other nodes controlled by players.
*How did you feel about Mass PvP?
Love it, but usually don’t have the money to buy that good PC to really play mass PVP contents. For example the max I willing to spent on a gaming PC is around 800-1000 USD. The frame rate is too low on 800-1000 USD PCs so I rarely play mass PVP contents.
*What do you believe the perfect balance to be between PvE and PvP objectives?
To me in a MMO. One is to reduce any kind of things that designed specific for PVE objectives only or for PVP objectives only as possible. Two is try the best to puzzle PVE and PVP elements together when designing every different objective no matter it’s a PVE objective or PVP objective.
*What would be the ideal frequency for events like Node Wars in your opinion?
One to three times in a season.
*What kind of impact do you want events like these to have on a larger war?
I don’t really know. But I don’t like to have a too big advantage by just win one event. And the advantages can be stack too much makes the situation fall to one side is also not fun. Maybe for short is I don’t like snowball effect no matter I’m winning or losing.
*What event rewards do you think would be cool?
Tittles? Second name? That you can put on your name plate or player card like hunter card in Monster Hunter?
Like maybe give you a tittle called War Hero if you are the one who kills most enemies. God’s hand if you heal so much player that under 20% HP and not let them die in a short period. Something like that, some tittle are easy to get some tittles are hard. Some tittles are fun some tittles are cool.
Fantastic. That is the perfect direction to go. Keep things objective based and keep it in the open world.
What excites you about playing and interacting with the Node Wars system?
I'm excited for the ability to plan and execute strategy instead of a zerg ffa. It will be important to make sure groups always have multiple strategies they can use to "win a map". It's important that you not be able to always predict what an opponent is going to do.
Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
Nope. Testing will start to flesh out issues or exploits but so far it's fantastic.
I also love the results of the combat, like adding buffs, taking partial control of enemy territory etc. Great showcase, please keep this direction.
it was ok. i am not a big pvper though. it looked like a lot of just zerg rush battle the whole time.
What excites you about playing and interacting with the Node Wars system?
if there is a lot more gameplay to the wars. have instead of just a box like a storehouse with like a courtyard that fills up with whatever the mayor has put as their objectives.
Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
i would like to see like the primary objectives and a secondary or optional objectives and their progress.
Are there similar systems you’ve seen in other games that you like or dislike? If so, please explain!
How did you feel about Mass PvP?
i liked when i played wow that they had one where you go capture 5 points and then you had to hold those points before you started collecting the stuff to win. i liked that you could go do pve stuff like collecting wood for fortifications that made some or made them tougher. you could turn in armor scraps to increase the npc's level making them tougher and do more damage. i liked the ones where your homebase sent out groups of like 5 npc's that would take paths to the enemy base (meeting in the middle) and you could have people assist that group and like i said earlier then have objectives like taking over the blacksmith point would increase damage and resistances, taking over the farm would make them spawn a little faster, etc.
i know some stuff was speed up or skipped over but, after you declare war have that camp set up and you then have to bring resources for the war effort. bring food, armor, bolts of cloth, raw resources like wood, rock. if you had some of the stuff have to be brought in a caravan then there could be a chance for "outsiders" to interact with that war either by bringing in stuff themselves or if there was a type of contract where the town that declared war had a caravan task to bring the supplies from town to the war camp and the one that it was defending could have a task to stop those caravans
to many games try to artificially create this conflict with everyone being human and on one side and it could be done easier with alignments, reputation and racial bias also. good going out and looking for people with the evil alignment and kill them, if they accidently kill a good person then it slowly changes them from good to evil (ore if an evil kills evil they turn good}. so even though they can permanently pvp but they have to be careful of who they kill. if as part of the classes and religions they had "required alignments" and they lost that alignment they would lose those abilities and have to change to a new one that fit their alignment as part of this risk/reward and your choices matter. i also believe that not everyone should be able to or can do everything, like a wizard using a sword and plate, yes, they "could" but it decreases their mana pool, gives greater chance of spells failing (or like in a dnd it miscasts and causes another effect}, spells taking longer to cast and having the feats that could counteract some of those or lessen the negatives. to become a Valkyrie you first have to be female and then have with reputation that only if you have a good reputation then you could join them.
the religions have their own battles against other religions. the dwarves hating the orcs and the orcs having a battle rage when the moon is red and that is when they rampage and try to kill everyone. a race that doesn't believe or really have the knowhow to farm during harvest time go and raid the towns who have farms and try to bring enough food back for the rest of the year.
they could with this node and vassal thing go the king in the level 6 node wants to take over the nearby kingdom and, on their map, they have their own war declaration where the nodes under them get a bonus so then the lower node that is a vassal also declares war on a specific zone in that kingdom, they also get another bonus.
Thanks for sharing this preview of your Node War content development.
Q: How do you feel about the Node Wars Preview?
A: The preview and stream overall were nice. Regarding the content design itself I'm not sure I quite understand what your intent or goal is for this content. If the Node Wars are intended to be a preamble for Node Sieges and large scale pvp combat for the future of a node, I'd suggest to make the Node War objectives more meaningful. The objectives to fight over seemed like random uninteresting tasks. I'd suggest something like a capture the flag mode. Maybe like both sides have bases or outposts like in New World's Outpost Rush mode where the pve'rs go collect materials and build the bases, and the pvp minded players either defend their outposts flag or go on the offensive to enter the enemies outposts, take flags, and run them back to their base safely. Or just capture and hold them to control certain zones for periods of time for points. The content shown wasn't really interesting for PVE or for PVP as it kind of seemed aimless without clear meaningful objectives that were fun to fight over.
Q: Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
A: I disliked how Bow players were constantly rat(ing) on top of narrow ledges, spikes, platforms to make it difficult for other classes to interact or trade with them in group pvp combat. I think this fps playstyle of ranged dps is toxic in an mmo. I didn't mind climbing on top of wide platforms like the cottage flat roof or even the tower outlook. Those can be contested. But jumping/climbing on top of a narrow wall and dps'ing players from atop a spiked defensive fortification where it would be difficult for other roles to get to them and engage in combat is lame imo and cheese that should not be allowed. Bow is also too much of a machine gun imo with its fire rate for an mmo. The machine gun bow audio should also be adjusted to not be so distracting, annoying. When multiple bows were machine gunning and the audio overlaps it becomes obnoxious. I'd try to adjust the audio effects to where players don't want to mute all game effect audio because one weapon ability effect is too redundantly annoying to listen to or a cacophony of sound.
Q: Are there similar systems you’ve seen in other games that you like or dislike? If so, please explain!
How did you feel about Mass PvP?
A: New World's Outpost Rush is more interesting. Albion Online's Black Zone territory and/or mage capture/defense system is more interesting and objective based fun. New World's War mode being the best I've played but probably aligns more as a parallel to Node Sieges in Ashes.
I'd like to see updates to make less game structures be able to be climbed and for ranged players to dps from (pikes, narrow ledges, narrow wall tops). A lot of the areas the bow players were climbing on to dps/rat from will cause buggy combat interactions if melee players try to engage with the ranged player. It seems like you're opening the game up to unintended exploits or cheese from ranged players to be able to prevent damage interactions either in pvp or pve.
I'd also like to see at least half the classes have counters to this cheese/rat ranged climbing and perch atop structures playstyle if its left in the game. Not all roles need to be able to counter it as you mentioned with your rock, paper, scissors combat design. But a good amount of the classes need to be able to have reliable answers for this cheese/rat playstyle (that shouldn't be in an mmo imo). Ie. the A1 tank Chain pull, the Warrior leap and dash from recent showcase (I hope that works for the high elevations and narrow ledges/pikes bow players are using), maybe a charm ability for Bard's, maybe Summoner's can force teleport an enemy to be adjacent to them, a fellow guild member suggested a REFLECT ability and I like that idea. The range of bow from the bell tower's in this video are very far. Like their max range appears further vertically than they are horizontally. Is this intended?
As a pvp player I wasn't very hyped for Node Wars after watching the demo. I'd rather it be more Mideival. Capturing small outposts or forts in Node Wars, then big castles in the Node Siege or Castle Siege. Because the content was also minimal I'd probably look to time these events to be around 30-45 minutes tops so they don't drag on and become stale.
For coastal nodes it would be great if they somehow were based around ship and sailing content and naval pvp.
Regarding rewards the winning combatants should receive coin or something, not just the node. If the benefits are simply increased PVE (raid boss) access, gathering yield idk how that appeals or supports pvp content or interested players? I'd like to see things like increased rewards during the Hostile War period leading up from the initial Node War declaration thru Node Siege period to have a reward system in place for defeating members of the opposing side. Maybe collect tokens per kill to give to an NPC vendor at your home node for various rewards, like Faction vs Faction warfare in Albion Online. Defeated enemies during the Node Wars, Siege, and open-world pvp during the hostile period all count as long as the defeated player is a citizen of the hostile node. Maybe the side that wins each stage of a node war receives combat effectiveness bonuses vs the hostile node citizenry as well, increased xp, coin, rewards from running pve content in their zone after the node war?
The feel of pvp combat did look better overall than I expected. More fluid and fast than seen in the class showcases.
While this might be contrary to your vision for the game, another idea is simply to scrap the concept of Node Wars altogether and just have Node Sieges but at a higher frequency if your team doesn't want to spend a lot of assets into developing a unique fun mode for the preliminary node group pvp content. Maybe just have the Node War be a reduced size Fort to defend instead of the Node Siege massive castle from Alpha 1 testing and accept smaller amounts of players on each side to attack/defend.
Phase 1 Node War - Attacking a few bases or outposts.
Phase 2 Node War (on a separate day if Phase 1 successful on attack) - Attack a Fort. PVE goes to gather to build siege engines for attack and fortifications for defense.
Phase 3 Node Siege (if the first two attack phases were successful by the attackers) - Against the large scale Alpha 1 Castle, or the Node itself if that's what you have in mind.
The idea of running around to kill bandit pve camps or gather red ruby's as part of a Node War objective seems like a placeholder imo that isn't something you'll want to commit to due to not being engaging. If you're looking for replay value to have the events every 1-3 hours during the prime time hours I'd probably go back to a capture the flag or king of the hill type contest as I suggested earlier. Maybe the enemies have to run to your base, kill some pve guardians and actual players defending their flag, and if they capture your flag run it back. Have it last 30-45 minutes whoever claims more wins the round idk. Maybe let pve players be sappers that destroy enemy fortifications and/or build your own base.
I get that your design intent is to keep the game as casual and pvx oriented. And that makes sense. But I'd still try to aim towards creating compelling content and not sacrifice that for either PVE or PVP. I don't think the current iteration of Node Wars presented were compelling for either.
* The system design is great! I love the idea of having different types of wars a mayor can declare.
* The combat has come a long way. Abilities and movement are looking more fluid.
Health Bars Constructive Feedback
They feel very unresponsive. For a while I thought there was a bug where damage wasn't applying instantly/lag before I realized that they only change in 25% chunks. In the spirit of keeping with the original design intentions, I'll offer a few suggestions to alleviate this problem without getting rid of the obfuscation of health.
Improvements
On-Hit Animations
Play an animation effect on health bars whenever they take damage (bonus points for a different effect whenever they take healing too). This could be something a simple as a quick flash of red (or green for healing?) to show that some form of damage/healing is taking place on the unit.
Color-Stacking Health Bar Style
Instead of a single bar split into 4 "chunks" that only updates after the health has moved between thresholds, use a "stacking" health bar where each chunk is a different color. Have the health bar gradually fade between states as they take damage/healing. While this will give the player a little more info on the current health of their enemy, I believe it would still obfuscate enough while giving more feedback from player actions.
At the very least, this could be an option to toggle between different health bar styles.
Edit: Here are two clips to illustrate what I'm thinking of. Something between using the "stacking" health bar effect of the first, and the obfuscated "fading" effect from the second
.
- The Node Wars preview? It looked awesome, can't wait to see how it gets polished!
- I am a little concerned how the Node Wars will affect those in the region not a part of the war or if outsiders will be able to create issues for those in the war.
- I do love the idea of being able to use wars to push player diplomacy when it comes to territory, trade, or even possibly player alliances!
- I think Mass PVP can be healthy even for PVE folks time to time but also like the PVE tasks within the war, this sorta gives a nice role for everyone!
- I like the idea of the wars being time consuming, watching the preview had me excited but I couldn't imagine doing wars back to back, would be exhausting. Which can be a good and bad thing. But i don't have enough info or game exp which i'm sure Alpha 2 will help with seeing some of the limitations or help feel out how to tune some of the time frames!
- Also the terrain looked spacious and not over crowded which i think was likely done with large scale events in mind and love it!
Sorry I know it's not what you want feedback on currently, but those fx were so alarming that it pulled me out of my lurker hole so I'll give my nickel and then crawl back.
System wise the Node Wars seemed perfectly fine. Chaotic, strategic, room for organized team play. It has all the elements.
But my lord it was hard to look (or hear) past those effects. From the weird red Tron walls that would have looked great in a Shadowrun matrix, to the laser beams criss crossing the battlefield, to those Ranger pew pew audio fx. I had to double-check I wasn't watching Star Wars Battlefront as the pvp turned into a Sci Fi light show.
Maybe one of those systems that plays better than it looks, but jesum - all those effects that looked so awesome in a small scale just fell apart for me on a larger one. I think I'll stick to the smaller group stuff and questing for the immersion. I'll cheer the rest of you on from afar with sunglasses and ear plugs.
Raid Grouping
Mass PvP isn't a major thing for me - so I don't have much feedback on the Node Wars itself.
However, people 'falling out of the raid' was a huge concern. I think that raids should auto-group similarly to the way we saw during the caravan stream. We shouldn't have to micro-manage the raid system during the war objective. If players want to join after the mustering time, they will wind up being effectively solo and cut off from the main group in ways that are unsavoury.
One-Dimensional Combat
Combat is currently very 'burst' centric. There's not a lot of layers to combat currently. Granted, the classes don't have their full kit and we don't have augments yet - but one dimensional combat leads to an easy thing to maximize for, which will lead to a stale pvp meta.
What is missing: Pressure tactics through hexes and DoTs. We didn't see very much effectiveness of conditions - stagger, knockdown, ensnared, burning didn't seem to play much of a factor from what we saw as an overview. Perhaps these factors are expected to come in through the missing rogue and bard archetypes, or through the augments - such as Cleric's death, rogue, or bard.
Limited Perspective
This probably wasn't intended (and was probably noticed during editing) but we lacked any perspective from the Tank players. The PIs in Discord were singing the praises that Tank gameplay was top notch, but too bad we saw none of it.
What's more is that of the classes we did see through their perspective... they were all using the same spec. The rangers were all using machinegun shortbows, the mages all had the same spells (no earth magic), and the clerics very rarely put down any obvious zone effects that we saw in previous showcases. (One did try to use the chains spell but that ensnare didn't feel like it had any impact on the combat)
This creates the perception that the meta is easily solved and that many of the purported 'options' aren't really impactful at the moment. Your testers are operating on a narrow lens or the other options aren't nearly as fleshed out as you pretend that they are.
Thanks for the stream!
Edit to add;
Stealth
Looks good. It's faint enough you'd miss it if you aren't looking for it or if you were standing still or in a darker area. I only noticed it because Steven said something about a Camouflaged Ranger moving past him and I rewound and noticed two different clips where rangers were moving around in camo. I only saw it because i was looking for it.
My only other thought was about the territory for this node war type. I noticed when Steven opened his map it showed the territories of the nodes, and the two nodes that were at war had neighboring territories.
I'm very curious as to how this plays out when the nodes are far away from each other. Do all of the events happen in one of the node's territory? If one node does really well in the first phase, would the events in the next phase be "pushed back" towards the other node's territory?
And it is very, very nice to see any form of territory being gained through combat. When it comes to sieges, it's not as if the node that won the siege now has more territory under it's control as a direct result of that siege, in many cases it's ZOI might not change much at all. So it's nice to see there is at least some form of fighting over land.
I'll tend to the flame, you can worship the ashes.
Curious though will be do these areas have quests/tasks that can be utilized outside the war efforts. Or can you perhaps have dictated time frames over a period because that would allow Node populations/Mayors whom are less focused around combat perhaps use wealth to hire members of neighbouring nodes to fight on there behalf like mercenaries. As this would allow people from nodes that don't have as great an influence to maybe get involved in other fights for rewards, even if their own node doesn't see similar/frequent action.
I would like to see more small unit/special OPs game play. and while it should have an affect, the lack should not. IE, I loved blowing generators and keeping them down. It had an effect on gameplay, but if no one did it, the battle would still go on.
I would also like to see buildings/societies have war scenarios. Thieves guild vs Thieves guild; Religions needing to appease their god for war benefits, and definitely PvE scenarios.
On an unrelated note: can you be up front about how many subs need to be on a server to pay for it? We all know there is a boom bust cycle coming at launch, and it would be nice to know when a server is closing in on the magic shutdown number. This would also help players know when they need to panic and start getting sign ups to their servers.
I like most of what was shown, I am curious of how different it would be a node war between a Vandagar node and a Elyrium node.
What excites you about playing and interacting with the Node Wars system?
Node Buff and Cool objectives is something I am looking forward. Also maybe some building destruction to make it feel more inmersive.
Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
When it comes to UI I like clean UI would love diferent healthbars for each class (Different color) and size + some damage numbers fonts. There was some bugs with the dragon wings and the horse sliding when running and some fps issues. Some people said diferent spell color efect to avoid confussion.
Are there similar systems you’ve seen in other games that you like or dislike? If so, please explain!
Not quite.
How did you feel about Mass PvP?
I feel like theres a number on mass pvp that I feel is good need to test that I dont know if 500 or 1000 people is way too much tobe enjoyable.
I would like tike to share some thoughts, excitement, and concerns on the preview on the Node Wars system displayed today. To help with this long winded post, any preamble, or maybe less important thoughts will be in this font here.
I cannot express how pleased I am that the development team is taking the time to make a good product rather than a rushed product. The game itself has come so far in just a few years since the Alpha 1 playtest. The preview today was a prime example of the Ashes vision that has been hyped up for so long, coming to a realized and physical state.
A few good war types are something that excite me on a personal level as. A good combination of PvE/PvM and PvP to impact these wars leaves little to be missed. It offers all play styles a place in wars, and a feeling of impact on your nodes success. While it is flashy and exciting to be the sword, arrow, spell, what ever it is that delivers the final blow ; everyone who participates will feel their efforts and that is awesome ! Finding the perfect balance will take time, and possibly it could change with each war type. Obviously a war that is destructive in nature might lean towards more PvP objectives, and a friendly node war may lean more towards PvE objectives. The type of node might also sway the objectives offered. A military node should have more PvP objectives, or at least more PvM. I could see an economic node having some shady PvE objective where they hire mercenaries worth no objective points but are in the way of hostile objectives. I see a lot of potential in the options and am excited for this entire branch of the game.
The rewards mentioned are a good start. Depending on the type of war, the rewards should be distributed between the active people who scored points, and possibly to the nodes residents who were not able to directly impact the war, but still have an impact on the nodes overall success. The node wide buffs were something that really do this well. Similar to the objectives varying I do believe the rewards should also vary for the different node types. While they should all have some basic rewards, having unique rewards will further enforce the Identity of the nodes, and the residents who live there. The timed cooldown for these rewards is also extremely well implemented. I don't think having a buff constantly in a node is good. Instead planning with the community on when to finish the projects or claim the rewards to maximize the effects will be something that the Node Mayors will need to do to retain favor. I see buffs being held or saved for Weekends to make sure the maximum numbers of players can utilize them. Especially if they would be on cooldown during the weekend if used otherwise. This drives player interaction, and develops a real sense of community, and to me that is what an MMO is all about.
In regards to the scope, scale and size of PvP battles I think having a mix of both is always nice. I am much more of a small scale fighter myself I have taken part in the thousand person battles that reach headlines in Eve Online, to the ZvZ fights during covid in Albion online multiple zones were locked at capacity with 400 players in each fighting for control, to the Proving Grounds in World of Warcrafts Arena modes, Mobas and wormhole life in Eve Online where a small gang of 3-4 people can sometimes be a formidable force. All PvP has its place, and should be given room. Having multiple randomly spawning objectives at once with varying values would help let groups decide what they think is best. If you have 31 people on for the war and 5 objectives are available, one of them being more valuable than the other 4, you may want to form a larger group to go for that objective, where as if the objectives are more equally spaced you'd want to spread out more in smaller groups. This would allow for more fluid PvX and an ability to do both styles.
My concerns
How many wars can one node participate in at once. If only one war was allowed I could see the system being abused. by two friendly nodes declaring war on one another to avoid any outsiders from declaring an actual war. I do believe having multiple wars at once or at least a queue system for wars would be best. I do however envision the many simultaneous wars being a catalyst for a World War situation occurring at some point. One of the other possible solutions is an increased cost of declaring war on the same node in rapid succession.
The other major concern, is speculation. We saw in the video that war was declared right outside the encampment and you quickly dispatched a few hostiles from the opposing node. A war declaration without a timer could easily be abused, Eve online may not be the best example because I don't believe a 24 hour notice of wars start and end should be necessary, but some window of time should be given for the players to react to the declaration appropriately.
To anyone who made it this far, thank you for taking to time to read, and hopefully critique my post. This was all done after a long day at work, at 2 am on a Friday night / Saturday morning, so it is entirely possible I missed something. Either way all feedback would be awesome, I love discussing games.
The way you start the war is good, I like the fact you have to have a lot of player buy in to achieve the objectives to declare a war, it is building on having a good relationship with the Mayor and the citizens of the Node.
One main thing I took from the gameplay is that it looked interesting and fun to play. I liked the objective based system in play, it allows for small and large scale PvP, It will keep the Wars fresh and interesting and I am looking forward to seeing the other war types and how they play out.
I thought that having a war have different "phases" is really interesting and something I didn't expect, I assumed it would just be a one off siege ( I hope a siege is one of the final phases of the war) but I was happy to learn it would be different phases which allows some interesting back and forth throughout the war.
I thought the performance was decent for a pre A2 game. I was happy to hear that the dev team are really focusing on the players "gameplay information" that they will see on screen, I am hoping they will strike the right balance.
I think going forward, with similar PvP livestreams, it would be great to upload separate videos of different class perspectives. So release Node War a Fighters perspective or Node War a Rangers perspective. It would really help to see how these classes are being played/coming together.
Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
One disappointment I had was hearing that it isn’t intended for vassals to be able to siege one another. The preview showed two L3 Nodes, it seems that currently it would be a race to beat that node to the highest level but then what happens? You have built a great system to allow rivalries like Winstead v Miraleth but the rivalry will just end because one reaches the other level or wins an early war? Seems like a missed opportunity to continue rivalries (or develop alliances through diplomacy) and continued change throughout the world. If my node is now set at L3 in its’ vassal structure can it continue to develop or is it now locked until another node falls in the structure? If it’s locked then there is no real reason for people to stay as citizens to that Node, most will just flock to the higher level Nodes.
Another concern is generally the combat, it seemed very reliant on range and not many players playing melee dps. It was mentioned that there were mini metas forming from the play testers, it was concerning that nearly all dismissed the Fighter. I had these concerns from the past few livestreams and was hoping some group PvP like this would demonstrate the need/opportunity for the Fighter but it still seemed to be dominated by range. Dredd was playing the Fighter, it would be good to see their perspective to see how viable the Fighter was and why hardly any other players chose that class.
It seemed like there was lots going on in the combat which was good to see, but please add a roll dodge, give players ways of avoiding attacks and elements of evasion, it would massively enhance the gameplay.
Final couple are just pure personal preferences, but I am still not a fan of players having to sit down during combat and global cooldowns should be replaced with resources, you already have the mana requitement just adjust it to replace GCs.
Both pvp and pve during pvp have always loved such mechanics.
I see that many are not very happy with the color palette of spells. Visual effects can be reduced for physical classes. But magic ones don't.
The effects are HORRIBLE (sorry), might be okay if you have three players. But having everywhere vulcanos, circles, ranger with a neon green multishot filling half of the screen is just plain horrible. Again: please finally make effects much much smaller and less bright.
Time to kill was much too long. Why nearby noone needs heals or revival?
The animations during the rapid fire ability of the shortbow should be a single draw instead of several rapid draws that don't follow the fire rate.
The color of abilities was too strong, it should be toned back mildly.
In this showcase mounts were largely unused by the general players... many players advocate against rangers using weird perches however if mounts in the future offer many gap closers there is no need to remove the rangers ability to sit on weird high perches.
A long time ago a gliding mount was shown in the showcase to be able to run and jump for a glide, this offers a perfect backline entry for players and counters the weird perch angle from rangers appropriately. This doesn't even consider all the other possible mounts we haven't seen and don't know about.
The event was solid, it could be because I myself wasn't playing but seeing who was channeling was difficult, was multiple people channeling making it happen faster?
I would recommend changing the catchup mechanic of the scholars, each scholar should drop more blood for the team to use to catchup however it should reduce the godspike channel speed not increase it. Reducing it puts the behind team on the backfoot with a chance, increasing it actually gives the team that is behind quite the opening to comeback and made the advantage gained by channeling first feel insignificant.
Incredible stream! I loved watching and look forward to getting my hands on it! Good luck on the networking side.
Edit: I am unsure if this was the case, however both teams should have separated channeling. Additionally the team that got to the spike first should channel mildly faster. If team 1 is at 50% channeling and team 2 arrives they should be at 0% not 50% as well
That said, I would like to talk a bit about what wasn't exactly shown, and maybe it is planned but I would like to suggest it anyway. A big system like this one needs to be meaningful and relevant, and not only a "minigame" that players do for rewards or when they are bored. I would like wars to be a system that enriches the political intrigue of the entire world and gives nodes the chance to achieve different political victories.
Let's take territory control for example. The first thing that comes to mind is: Why are nodes choosing this type of war? Well, they obviously have territory disputes with neighboring nodes. So this war type should focus on events and objectives disputing territory. Setting up forward operating bases, controlling important roads and POIs. The biggest and most dire consequence of a territory control dispute would be a siege. So I believe territory wars should allow for diplomatic resolution in the middle with the possibility of permanent (until the next war changes it) reshaping of a node's zone of influence, or at least long-term benefits. If no diplomatic resolution happens, then the last step of a territory war is a siege. So if an attacking node manages to achieve the objectives and complete all phases, they should get a siege scroll and finish the war in a big siege battle. (I know node wars and node sieges are not directly related but I think there should absolutely be a path where a war turns into a siege)
So, in short, I would like wars to be coherent in their motives -> victory conditions -> phases and objectives -> events -> rewards and punishments. For instance, a territory war shouldn't give points for random murder everywhere, because that doesn't progress the victory condition and is not coherent with the motive of the war. Killings inside or near the contested territory, sure (and hopefully minimal gains compared to actually completing the objectives or kills while inside an event area), but not everywhere.
I would also like to see multiple victory conditions and paths to winning a war, and not just "win the event that pops up at the prime time". Maybe multiple events pop up and the attackers/defenders choose the event that helps them achieve their chosen victory condition. Last but not least, maybe a little less UI elements and notifications indicating what to do and everything.
On a related note, I would also like to discuss the whole vassal/parent relation. I don't see how the reasons given for a vassal not to be allowed to attack a parent node are going to be true. There are 2 possible situations in a vassal/parent relation:
1. Being in a parent node is better than being in a vassal. This is my expected outcome in real gameplay. In which case then you as a vassal citizen totally want to attack your parent, so your node can keep growing and eventually become a parent node.
2. Being in a vassal node is equal to or better than being in a parent node. This could be the case if you get all the benefits from the parent node as a vassal. So a vassal has all the benefits of being in that vassal system without the negatives of being the BIG target and losing your stuff on a siege. In this situation, the entire node system kinda loses its meaning and sense, I don't see how can this actually be the intended design.
But I think case 2 is an impossible scenario as a general case. Let us say I have become a citizen of a node in the early stages and got a place right in the middle of the town. It then levels up and my house goes up in value, and again, until I'm stopped from progressing because I'm stuck as a vassal. Now I have total reason to want to attack my parent node and aid in their destruction. Another scenario: I dislike the way the parent node has been ruling and I want different metropolis buildings and benefits. So even when you say "there is no difference between being a citizen of a vassal or a metro", it can't be true in all cases, there will always be scenarios where it's in the vassals' interest to challenge its parent.
And then comes the argument "Well just leave your node then", and it's an absurd one. The whole point of the node system is to become invested in your node, help it grow, get a good house, build a community, and have a say in its progression. It's your home. Not to mention the 30-day cooldown afterward. Leaving your node should absolutely not be my only choice to deal with this issue. Probably shouldn't be the only way to deal with any issue tbh. Especially since the only reason why fighting your parent node is not allowed is "you don't want it, trust me". Isn't this game supposed to have as a core pillar player agency, and player freedom? If it's truly in my best interest not to fight my parent node, why not let that choice fall to me?
And then you add the cherry on top which is the timeline. It takes a few days only to get to level 3. So only in a few days after the launch multiple nodes will be locked from progression and will have to count on players from far away to deal with their progression block. and that won't happen anytime soon because players won't be worried about sieging, they will be worried about progressing their own node and char. It just doesn't make sense. So unless a better reason is said than "it's for your own good" comes up, I can't understand why this is the choice you guys are going with.
Last but not least, the combat. I really loved the tank walls, more of this, please. The TTK is looking okay, I would like to see a more organized GvG to be sure, but so far looks like the healers and tanks are maintaining a good group TTK while DPS vs DPS battles end quicker. But please don't even think about dropping the TTK down even further, it will kill most of the tactical and organizational skills in the game.
The preview was great; I enjoyed the multiple viewpoints from different players.
What excites you about playing and interacting with the Node Wars system?
Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
I think there is a huge potential here and the initial idea that was previewed in the stream is exciting.
I loved:
Are there similar systems you’ve seen in other games that you like or dislike? If so, please explain!
How did you feel about Mass PvP?
In Guild Wars 2, there’s a unique map for WvW, which I really enjoyed, but it was disappointing that it is not part of the main world. The fact that it was always "active," yet often empty with no activities to be found, made it feel boring.
When your server is active, it is really exciting to play. You have commanders with unique tags you can always see on the map, there are fortresses and garrisons you can conquer and take control from the enemy, and there is the main fortress in the middle which is very hard to conquer. You need a lot of people, strategy, and you can build war weapons to help you destroy the walls or gates.
Now my notes of what I personally would love to see
War begins
After declaring a war, it would be better if there was a special war caravan event that goes from one node to the initial area inside the enemy node.
The caravan is accompanied by NPCs with banners (and maybe even war music?).
After reaching the enemy node, the mayor decides where to deploy the encampment.
Battle encampent
In the encampment, there is a board with objectives.
Every player can come and take an objective as a quest and is automatically added to the objective group party, which is also part of the overall raid.
Or maybe the board shows the groups they can join, and the objective is decided later.
You can't join a group with x players if another group has x-5 players, so the groups are balanced.
In the stream, Steven told each group what their objective was, but this wouldn’t work under regular circumstances because not everybody will be online on Discord, and people hop on and off from the event, which can create a mess.
Roles
The Mayor: Apart from what was shown, each objective group can have one special player anointed by the mayor to be a "General."
The General: Has a special non-flying mount with some small buff/debuff abilities depending on the node's race.
He can also mark commands for his group only (which the mayor can do to any group he wants to command or a general mark for the whole raid).
Maybe even create a small event that gives a small amount of exp to the war effort so people would be inclined to obey these commands and not just ignore them because they seem insignificant.
Objectives
The bandit objectives feel weird and disconnected from the war effort; I didn’t like them very much, so I would suggest changing them to encampments/garrisons of the defending node. The objective would be to defend/attack with a timer.
There's a progress bar with stages; each POI destroyed before the timer gives rewards and provides benefits for the later phases of the war.
The attacking node should reach at least 80% of the zone conquered for them to win this battle and control the zone, but reaching 100% gives extra bonuses for later phases. (The idea of 80% is because from my experience, attack/defend events are mostly unbalanced, and it is harder to successfully attack than defend; it can be tweaked later on.)
Mayors Mount
I think the mayor’s mount should have more attack abilities so the mayor doesn’t just fly around half the time doing nothing.
That being said, there should also be special weapons crafted to not only attack/defend the garrisons but also deal great damage to the mayor’s flying mount.
Battle Progress
Maybe it is better to keep this idea for the advanced phases of the war, but I would like to see some exp/points system where reaching certain points can give access to new mechanics like:
Summoning special NPCs:
- Tier 1 (small amount of points): Regular soldiers (DPS, tank, support).
- Tier 2 (medium amount of points): Miniboss dependent on the node area, like an elite minotaur.
- Tier 3 (very high amount of points): Node’s champion (raid boss) dependent on the node’s race.
Note: I acknowledge this event is already full of players besides it being in the open world so it could be too much for the servers to handle.Crafting special weapons with some of them dependent on the nodes type:
Catapults, trebuchet, and rams to breach the garrisons or oil spill for the defense.
- Divine nodes: Energy weapons (less powerful than cannons but aren’t blocked by shields) and buffs.
- Economic nodes: Mercenary recruitment with unique bandit skills/weapons.
- Military nodes: Firepower like cannons.
- Academic nodes: Teleporters and area shields.
End of phase 1 / End of battleAfter the end of a battle, the winning node has a little event in the city with fireworks and music.
The local tavern in the city gives 1 free drink (some exp/money/luck buff) to encourage players to enter the tavern and maybe even stay for minigames or music other players perform there.
- Impressed! this direction looks to have good incentives, fair participation, fair time investment, and ultimatley just looks fun to play or watch.
- I like that it looks like the system allows for opting in. I like that it doesn't limit participants and that anyone with direct stakes can reasonably contribute to the war effort.
- I like that it doesn't lean too hard on short term FOMO but also isnt drawn out so long that players feel like they can't make an impact by having spread out and long term goals with a mix of high stakes shorter term events that more greatly effect war progress but don't solely decide it.
- I like that it looks to encourage more pve centric players to participate and have a direct impact.
- I like the idea of a game loop that isn't solely endless wars, but periods leading up to - engaging in - and then reaping the benefits from the wars.
- I was concerned to hear that a way to differentiate between friendly and enemy player spells was not high priority, to me this is a standard accessibility feature in any pvp game.
- Some of my favorite large scale war systems in other games were Alterac Valley in (vanilla) world of warcraft and world v world map in guild wars 2. Both mixed pve objectives into the larger pvp war and allowed for forces to spread focus. Both lacked the in game impact and map variety that AOC looks to give.
- I disliked that similar systems in New World were so heavily weighted on quick limited access battles. Even worse those battles (when i played) did not prioritize stability and performance which led to broken/gimmicky/often unplayable fights.
- I like it when it feels spread out on multiple fronts with multiple objectives more like the early part of the showcase.
- I tend (not always) to dislike it when it devolves into massive dogpiles on one point like the final channeling at the end of the showcase.
- ehh 50/50? i dont think this matters so long as it's not aggressively (80%+) one or the other and that pve objectives are pvp enabled (like being able to loot pve objectives from enemy players rather than just race to kill x amount of things).
- What would matter more to me is the variety of objectives and their ability to limit or enhance the advantage of numbers vs small groups vs individuals.
- ideally there is a variety of objectives that cater to different team sizes and often encourage movement of focus and splitting of focus. I like the idea of creating ways of limiting how many can enter certain spaces at a time at key objectives or objectives that become more difficult as more people engage them-thus making small engagements more efficient at times. Though sometimes (perhaps often) I do expect numbers to have a clear advantage.
- depends how long they're intended to last. If they're expected to conclude within 1-6 hours....for nodes in conflict i would expect wars to be at the very least weekly and at most daily...perhaps a routine of roughly a day to prepare a day of war and a day to cooldown/reap benefits before the next sounds ideal to me.
- I would like node wars to give territorial advantages in larger wars like creating respawn points and staging areas, temporary outposts/strongholds, and of course buffs.
- the basics like exp/gold (performance based?), local resources, leader boards, a way to choose or influence a follow-up event or enable special commission(s), achievement progress that can unlock cosmetic rewards/titles/etc.
That was a good Presentation and definitely creates a Mood for more.
I liked very much, that we could see a State of "War" between two Nodes, without the Nodes actually going to each others' direct Borders and doing a "Siege" on their Opponent.
It is good to know, that Battles in a War can take Place in different Locations and not just at the very Places the Nodes are located.
I am excited and curious about how much "Profit" One as a Node and it's Citizens can make from it.
After all, War must at least make Sense as in someone should never start a War if there is nothing to gain from it. There must always be an Advantage and Reward for winning. Be it some territorial Control, or taking some powerful Relics and/or Artifacts away from your opposing Node/Enemy,
i am curious and excited for how much we can gain from actually going to War with someone.
I am a bit concerned regarding how much People could help out these Systems as Tester in Alpha Two,
as right now it looked still a little bit "juddery" and the Frames looked sometimes like the Presentation was struggling to work sometimes.
But maybe that is only my own Expression as when we saw Models from further away-Distances - like for Example one of the Dragons flying over the Battlefield from a bit further away and then it juddered a bit when it was circling over the Troops engaged in Battle.
This looks like it needs some serious Stress-Tests to provide Data to stabilize the Game in such Situations.
I am always a great Fan of huge, epic Mass Battles between many Players. If done right, it creates just the right Amount and Atmosphere of Action and Epicness,
without the whole Screen going under in a huge Wave of countless Players being in the very exact same Spot.
The best Mass PvP Experiences is, when TWO Forces/Armies of a huge Size collide with each other and the Battle is somewhat equal. Like no Side is steamrolling the other Side, but both Sides can effortlessly agree that the Battle was very exciting and stunning.
The perfect Balance is of Course - when Players can go for Objectives, like collecting Items, Ressources, etc. but they can be attacked by an Enemy Faction while during it, effectively being forced into Flight or Fight Situations of PvP.
When there is always the Option even during a huge Battle, to provide help in a PvP- or PvE-kind of Way, this also add's nicely to the whole Experience.
When one can for Example mine Ores, cut down Trees, or collect Food or Stuff for healing from the Side-Lines or from behind for the own Army,
or choose to fight the Enemy Forces directly at the Frontline in direct PvP.
Like a little bit further up - > my ideal Expectation is when Players can choose either to "support" their own Forces/Army indirectly as a Ressource-Gatherer, or a direct Frontline-Fighter heavily thrown into direct Combat with the Enemy Forces.
When People have the Feeling that they have " ACTUAL Options " instead of running only at the Enemy Forces like running into a Meatgrinder (lol) - this is usually the best kind of PvP Experience.
For awhile, even Planetside II managed that nicely. That was -> before the Game was being updated and patched into a literal Meatgrinder-like Model, by the Lattice-System and intentional Nerfs of other Possibilities to play, than to run directly into the Battle and die like a Thousand Times to push forward.
These Impacts should be something like territorial Buffs, influences - "MORE Quests" for Example on the Towns Board in Case one Node wins in an territorial Conflict over another Node,
something like "Monster Coin Rewards" for winning in a Node War,
something that can be used for further, Fun Game Play.
✓ Occasional Roleplayer
✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)
The node wars preview looks really great ! Thanks for your awesome job !
I have one remark about the war events. In the stream, it has been said that death penalty is not applied during these events, but I think it would be beneficial to keep it, with lowered effects though.
Death penalty in these events could be seen as fatigue. The more you died in the battle, the more you become vulnerable.
The battles will become shorter and shorter, so every tactical moves will be more and more important.
It'll bring a lot of strategy. You, as a raid leader, did good groups rotation on the front line so that you keep fresh soldiers in the main battlefield. Or you keeped in secret 2 groups of fresh soldiers, with their full fighting potential, to flank the enemy at the end of the battle.
We could also think of important consommables or strategic point of interest on the battlefield that you should conquer to get rid of fatigue.
As I said above, the effects should be lowered, maybe only affect resilience and respawn time.
Looks fun, the node war territory zone control moving after a successful objective victory is interesting.
-- Do something about bunny hopping. No one wants to see players bunny hopping endlessly across their screen.
-- Didnt see it addressed but I would help on pvp death if the respawn timer increases each time you die otherwise this pvx match is just going to be spawn rush.
-- Zerging is going to be a problem. I do not know what the answer is but some anti zerg mechanics should be considered.
*What excites you about playing and interacting with the Node Wars system?
Outside of the fun of actually participating in the direct events, I'm looking forward to how sieges affect the local economy and gameplay. A siege declaration sets a deadline for materials: to use it or lose it and ship it or risk losing it, among other decisions. You'll see the economy bustle with the news of a siege.
*Is there anything in particular you’re excited or concerned about regarding what was shown with the Node Wars Preview? (UI, VFX, and performance are things we know need love, and not what we want feedback on currently)
So far we've seen a lot of content encouraging pvp, I'm looking forward to seeing content encouraging large scale cooperation in pve.
*How did you feel about Mass PvP?
Looks amazing and well thought out. The differences in vfx for each class makes it more clear what's being done. If you see splashes of green, you instantly know there's a ranger doing damage or applying effects there, and from where. Sound design is also impressive here, it's cohesive and pleasant. Balance actually looked pretty good, but fighters didn't get to show off much. I anticipate the three missing classes will change that dynamic significantly, and resolve what seems to me like a lack of hard engages.
*What do you believe the perfect balance to be between PvE and PvP objectives?
In Node Wars, I'd like to see more competition towards a goal. That said I think what I'm looking for/forward to is covered by world events and competition for those resources/rewards. In the stream it looked like a healthy balance.
*What would be the ideal frequency for events like Node Wars in your opinion
I don't want to see this every day in every node. I WOULD like to see this every day in SOME nodes. It's only natural that you'll have clans that are constantly at war because that's just what they do. I hope that there's incentives in place to push pvp guilds against each other more often than they go after nodes more focused on pve/resources/crafting/etc. That sounds like an ideal variety to me.
*What kind of impact do you want events like these to have on a larger war?
If a larger war takes place over a few weeks or a month, I'd like to see events like this happen frequently, and have a tug of war plus potential for ending the war rewards. Some battles can have an effect so profound that they turn the tide of a war, others are stalemates, or just a regular strategic victory.
*What event rewards do you think would be cool?
Temporary titles that add points to a ticker for greater titles. Defender of (node's area name) or something, displayed to nearby players during a node war tells them you were there. That'd be cooler in the long run than most anything tangible or fungible.
Not only is this in contrast with what originally was announced, that on average a maximum of 10 people would have a flying mount.
The reasons why it will doom Ashes of creation is the same as the problems it has caused for every mmo that has flying mounts for personal use.
1) It will make PVE interactions null. Any natural chokepoint, every jump puzzle every mob density or lack thereoff will be rendered obsolete, people will just fly over the "hard" Parts
2) Flying mounts will be a must have. Forget about balancing mounts with abilities the only thing that matters will be "will it be able to fly" and "how fast can i fly with it"
3) PVP will be dead. Why fight if you can take flight and be out of reach? Controversially people will just swoop down and kill people with little of no consequences. Top down view granted by flight will always be tactically more important then anything you can do on the ground. After the kill you can fly off and move to a relative save zone to farm of your corruption.
4) Once you introduce flight for everyone there is no going back. It doesn't matter how hard it is to get it, eventually people will get it, and after enough of a server life, everyone will have it. Not only that, it encourages deprimental behaviour. It encourages people to level to the level where the flying mount is accessible asap.
5) It makes Caravan's useless. Why risk a caravan, if you can take your flying mount fly to where you want to go and be completely risk free. Worse if you do need to use a caravan due to something to bulky to carry yourself, how can you prevent people from scouting your slow caravan that needs to have a land or water based route, and allow other people to converge in a straith line to intercept. Even if they are unable to kill the caravan due to to many defenders, they don't risk anything. They will just fly away, and the caravan can't persue you because they will need to remain with the caravan.
6) Even if you only allow flying mounts during wars, people will instigate wars to use the mounts in the above ways without caring for the wars. As long as there is a war, people will be able to use their flying mounts. Once this is known, people will volontarily organize wars between other entities without ever intend to fight, for as long as the war is active they can use the flying mounts.
I've been following Ashes of creation for over 3 years and this is the first time that my faith is wavering!!!
The main thing is that we can continue to understand what skills we are being beaten with . Otherwise, everything will be turned off now and it will be unclear what is worth dodging and what is not.