It's important for AoC to avoid instanced content as much as possible since the basis of the game is player interaction.
They are avoiding instanced content as much as possible, hence why it's only 20% of content, but in some places you simply cannot balance an encounter without closing off the combat area. It's just not possible to do unless they dumb down the fights encounters and deny themselves the chance to use all sorts of mechanics, which is not what I want to see from them.
The challenge should come from the encounter once you've fought your way through mobs and other players to that final room in the dungeon. High-end content is there to test your teamwork and skill, not your patience for trolling from other players as the most noteworthy 'difficulty' facet.
I’m on my phone, It’s a OW PvX game, there shouldn’t be even 20% of the content.
Much hasn’t changed with the raid only crowd in the last twenty + years I’ve been playing MMOs.
At this point I don’t think I owe it to you when you talk at people, not interested in dialogue because you haven’t played an open world dungeon before. Your lack of experience doesn’t constitute anything on my part.
The bulk of your argument is “it’s impossible for devs to make great PvE content in the presence of PvP”.
You just haven’t seen it, that’s your problem.
No, I've said that it's not possible to design a high-precision raid if you have to account for other players actively attempting to sabotage it. I even gave you an example of how it happens in the face of punishing mechanics, more than one in fact but you haven't actually addressed any of it.
I've asked you to share these games that you claim have successfully blended extremely difficult boss encounters with an open PvP area, and you've declined to provide even one example. I'd be happy to engage in dialogue if you actually provided some evidence to back up your claim, as it goes against common sense and many people's direct experience with mixed PvX combat encounters.
Yeah dude, because you've been in instanced encounters you can only see it from the instanced pov.
You just think "only the encounter", the PvXer thinks give me the hard encounter + the threat, no need to dumb it down. If you cannot conceive how it would work that's fine, you only want encounters.
It's important for AoC to avoid instanced content as much as possible since the basis of the game is player interaction.
They are avoiding instanced content as much as possible, hence why it's only 20% of content, but in some places you simply cannot balance an encounter without closing off the combat area. It's just not possible to do unless they dumb down the fights encounters and deny themselves the chance to use all sorts of mechanics, which is not what I want to see from them.
The challenge should come from the encounter once you've fought your way through mobs and other players to that final room in the dungeon. High-end content is there to test your teamwork and skill, not your patience for trolling from other players as the most noteworthy 'difficulty' facet.
It’s a OW PvX game, there shouldn’t be even 20% of the content.
But here we come to your personal opinion, that I simply do not agree with.
You do understand that instanced content WILL NOT take away anything from the open-world content? All of the important stuff you do will be in the open-world.
If a certain group wants to "isolate" themselves, what's the problem with that? You cannot expect people to be 24/7 in the open-world, ready to be ganked by someone, at any time. Sometimes players want a different type of challenge, that open-world cannot provide.
I mean, there are so many ways to incorporate this into the game.
Maybe to access the instance, you have to clear an entire area of the open-world dungeon, so you can get access to it.
Maybe the dungeon only opens at certain time, under certain conditions. We know the world is going to be dynamic, so maybe only after certain ow events are completed, will the instance spawn.
There are so many ways to do it, that incorporates the Open-world aspect into it.
I think you are thinking about this, as if you will just queue into group finder, and go clear a dungeon, when it's simply not going to be the case with this game.
We can quickly see by your replies, that it's not the actual power gains that's an issue for you, but instanced content in general.
And I'll repeat this again, the rewards have to be good, in this case some level of power gain (on top of cosmetics or anything else), in order to make it worthwhile for players to actually do this content.
So again, as others have asked you, do you actually have an example of the game that managed to make high-end PvE content that's in open-world, with the risk of OW PvP at any time?
Also, I'm just going to ask, have you played Archeage? Do you think dungeons, library, etc. took away something from the game?
I thought Serpentis, Library, etc were executed extremely poorly, like most of the ArcheAge.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
OW PvXers will be the absolute heart, spine, and lungs of this game.
It's important for AoC to avoid instanced content as much as possible since the basis of the game is player interaction.
They are avoiding instanced content as much as possible, hence why it's only 20% of content, but in some places you simply cannot balance an encounter without closing off the combat area. It's just not possible to do unless they dumb down the fights encounters and deny themselves the chance to use all sorts of mechanics, which is not what I want to see from them.
The challenge should come from the encounter once you've fought your way through mobs and other players to that final room in the dungeon. High-end content is there to test your teamwork and skill, not your patience for trolling from other players as the most noteworthy 'difficulty' facet.
I’m on my phone, It’s a OW PvX game, there shouldn’t be even 20% of the content.
Much hasn’t changed with the raid only crowd in the last twenty + years I’ve been playing MMOs.
At this point I don’t think I owe it to you when you talk at people, not interested in dialogue because you haven’t played an open world dungeon before. Your lack of experience doesn’t constitute anything on my part.
The bulk of your argument is “it’s impossible for devs to make great PvE content in the presence of PvP”.
You just haven’t seen it, that’s your problem.
No, I've said that it's not possible to design a high-precision raid if you have to account for other players actively attempting to sabotage it. I even gave you an example of how it happens in the face of punishing mechanics, more than one in fact but you haven't actually addressed any of it.
I've asked you to share these games that you claim have successfully blended extremely difficult boss encounters with an open PvP area, and you've declined to provide even one example. I'd be happy to engage in dialogue if you actually provided some evidence to back up your claim, as it goes against common sense and many people's direct experience with mixed PvX combat encounters.
Yeah dude, because you've been in instanced encounters you can only see it from the instanced pov.
You just think "only the encounter", the PvXer thinks give me the hard encounter + the threat, no need to dumb it down. If you cannot conceive how it would work that's fine, you only want encounters.
I have already asked you to provide one example. If you can’t do that just say so, so we can all move on with our day.
So if you need to PvP to get to the PvE Boss the game better not make PvE and PvP gear a thing (i bet it will be). To my understand inventory is limited so swaps won't be as easy to bring. But in the end you can just buy everything so wallet warrior will be able to compete or dominate (or RMT like mad).
Instanced PvP should not be a thing either. Arenas removes player from the open world PvP and forces a bad small group PvP balance onto the game. Whiny arena players who demand locks and gate on PvP experience are a bane for any MMORPGs.
It's important for AoC to avoid instanced content as much as possible since the basis of the game is player interaction.
They are avoiding instanced content as much as possible, hence why it's only 20% of content, but in some places you simply cannot balance an encounter without closing off the combat area. It's just not possible to do unless they dumb down the fights encounters and deny themselves the chance to use all sorts of mechanics, which is not what I want to see from them.
The challenge should come from the encounter once you've fought your way through mobs and other players to that final room in the dungeon. High-end content is there to test your teamwork and skill, not your patience for trolling from other players as the most noteworthy 'difficulty' facet.
I’m on my phone, It’s a OW PvX game, there shouldn’t be even 20% of the content.
Much hasn’t changed with the raid only crowd in the last twenty + years I’ve been playing MMOs.
At this point I don’t think I owe it to you when you talk at people, not interested in dialogue because you haven’t played an open world dungeon before. Your lack of experience doesn’t constitute anything on my part.
The bulk of your argument is “it’s impossible for devs to make great PvE content in the presence of PvP”.
You just haven’t seen it, that’s your problem.
No, I've said that it's not possible to design a high-precision raid if you have to account for other players actively attempting to sabotage it. I even gave you an example of how it happens in the face of punishing mechanics, more than one in fact but you haven't actually addressed any of it.
I've asked you to share these games that you claim have successfully blended extremely difficult boss encounters with an open PvP area, and you've declined to provide even one example. I'd be happy to engage in dialogue if you actually provided some evidence to back up your claim, as it goes against common sense and many people's direct experience with mixed PvX combat encounters.
Yeah dude, because you've been in instanced encounters you can only see it from the instanced pov.
You just think "only the encounter", the PvXer thinks give me the hard encounter + the threat, no need to dumb it down. If you cannot conceive how it would work that's fine, you only want encounters.
The only people that think that are people that have not seen actual good PvE encounters.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
Those PvE players will stay if the PvE is good enough.
People leave games if they keep losing at things they care about (among other reasons - this is the reason we are focusing on here). To a PvP player, that is PvP.
However, to that PvE player, they don't care as much if they lose at PvP, as long as they are enjoying and being successful with the games PvE.
In an MMORPG in which PvP is a core aspect, and losing in PvP has punishment, it should stand to basic reason that not everyone in the game can be there for the PvP.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
Not if the PvE is actually good.
It seems somewhat obvious to me that you have this pre-concieved notion of what a PvE player is, and you are wrong. How you talk about PvE players comes across as you thinking of all PvE players as basically a charicature of a casual PvE dabbler - a weekend warrior.
Make the assumption that what you are considering "all PvE'ers" is actually kind of the lowest of the low in terms of PvE players, and then you may start to get an idea of how wrong your entire notion in this thread is.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
OW PvXers will be the absolute heart, spine, and lungs of this game.
Wiki states that
A single digit percentage of the population will be capable of defeating certain content.[102]
I always assumed that this content is a PvE instanced content and that will have some rewards too.
If you open such dungeons to any outside interference, it becomes impossible.
Or if you give no rewards, then why would anyone go through the hassle to complete it?
Or why developers would create such content?
Those who can complete such content, most likely can pvp too. Might not be the best PvPers and that is unfair in a PvP world.
Casual PvX players will not get anything. They'll be outside in the open world.
But there will be some instances for small teams too:
Instanced dungeons will also be present and will cater for solo and group questlines.[61]
I assume whatever those players get, will not keep them in those instances for long time.
Steven will observe the game balance and will tune things to work.
Risk vs Reward is important.
Yea this whole thread looks like its motivated by PvP elitists who demand that thouse filthy PvE's not get any gear that could possibly threaten their betters with.
I mean, other MMOs don't have any way to get BiS gear in the open-world, is it wrong to want one MMO where you need to actually participate in the "Massively" part of it to get good gear?
How do you get BiS in WoW through the open-world, or FF14?
Dunno about the new expansion but WOW Dragonflight had BIS gear for open world, PVP, and raids/dungeons. There were 3 sets.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
Not if the PvE is actually good.
It seems somewhat obvious to me that you have this pre-concieved notion of what a PvE player is, and you are wrong. How you talk about PvE players comes across as you thinking of all PvE players as basically a charicature of a casual PvE dabbler - a weekend warrior.
Make the assumption that what you are considering "all PvE'ers" is actually kind of the lowest of the low in terms of PvE players, and then you may start to get an idea of how wrong your entire notion in this thread is.
what makes good pve? is it the difficulty or something else?
is it better to make pve for the 99% of players or for the top 1% pve players?
is it better to make pve for the pvx players and forget about the pure pve players (or pure pvp players)
These are all also true points, and it bundles into the overall point of not being able to have the top-end content without putting some kind of lock-down on it.
Now, the scenario you presented is a weird one, mostly because you'd have to actually time it with another group to be paired up at all, otherwise it's just a 8-man team cruising through a boss designed around an 8v8 PvP match.
Other the other hand, it would be interesting to see an encounter race where one group completing a mechanic or placing an item/add would trigger something for the other group to handle, and visa versa. Off the top of my head for theme: some big lich making us fight for his entertainment or what have you, then whoever successfully clears that encounter gets to go on to fight the lich itself for phase 2.
Oh I probably should have been more clear on that, I imagined that all the 8 man groups basically have to wait in a locked room lobby (maybe fighting an endless stream of mobs), untill another group is also ready. This would be to prevent exploiting the system by just coordinating two groups friendly with each other to join simultaniously. It's basically random match making in game.
Your dueling groups is also an interesting concept, perhapse PvE fights in which each sides in a locked room and each time one side defeats a mob it respawns for the other group so they are effectivly trying to overwhelm your oponents with mobs. That's a formula that's been done before to blend pvp and pve.
Their is also the type of 'escape looter' type of game that become popular as of late, multiple groups go into a dungeon from different entrances and kill mobs for loot as the dungeon shrinks but then have to fight over the limited number of 'exit portals' to take their spoils out (lets say the loot must go in special bags which are dropped and fully lootable if you die). Such a system works only with gating of the groups in size and to drop them into the dungeon at the same time. Allowing many places in the world where magical portals to said dungeon exist would make it more likely that your matched up quickly and that you can't game the system with pre-arranged groups that are friendly to each other. Maybe this could even be the gameplay style of the 'Catacombs' assosiated with Religion nodes with all the world religion nodes of the same tier linked together with the highest tier religion nodes having the highest difficulty.
On a general note the success of games like Dark&Darker shows how PvX CAN be done and done well even inside of instancing, it just goes to show how intelectually bankrupt Caeryl's assumptions are because he can not concive of instances being anything but a WoW themepark ride.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
OW PvXers will be the absolute heart, spine, and lungs of this game.
Wiki states that
A single digit percentage of the population will be capable of defeating certain content.[102]
I always assumed that this content is a PvE instanced content and that will have some rewards too.
If you open such dungeons to any outside interference, it becomes impossible.
Or if you give no rewards, then why would anyone go through the hassle to complete it?
Or why developers would create such content?
Those who can complete such content, most likely can pvp too. Might not be the best PvPers and that is unfair in a PvP world.
Casual PvX players will not get anything. They'll be outside in the open world.
But there will be some instances for small teams too:
Instanced dungeons will also be present and will cater for solo and group questlines.[61]
I assume whatever those players get, will not keep them in those instances for long time.
Steven will observe the game balance and will tune things to work.
Risk vs Reward is important.
Yeah, like the Negalith. Most people will never kill the Negalith, because the opportunity won’t be there for them.
I would prefer story content to not be interruptible by PvP, even if it does offer significant rewards. Imagine some god/angel transporting your raid to the harbinger moon in order to face an ancient, the dialogue is epic, the stakes are the fate of Verra. Then some other guild comes rolling through while you fight the ancient and wipes you out. That would be really lame from a narrative standpoint.
The god/angel would be like:
As for people arguing against rewards... I don't really understand. Yeah, risk is a pillar of the game, but risk of PvP is only one avenue for creating risk. If a rival raid comes through and wipes you out, the end result is basically the same as if the difficulty of the instanced raid wipes you out. The risk is not succeeding, of investing time and not getting a return. You don't need hostile players to accomplish that.
I would agree if the instanced content was trivial and gave better rewards, but to expect that defies logic.
I would prefer story content to not be interruptible by PvP, even if it does offer significant rewards. Imagine some god/angel transporting your raid to the harbinger moon in order to face an ancient, the dialogue is epic, the stakes are the fate of Verra. Then some other guild comes rolling through while you fight the ancient and wipes you out. That would be really lame from a narrative standpoint.
The god/angel would be like:
As for people arguing against rewards... I don't really understand. Yeah, risk is a pillar of the game, but risk of PvP is only one avenue for creating risk. If a rival raid comes through and wipes you out, the end result is basically the same as if the difficulty of the instanced raid wipes you out. The risk is not succeeding, of investing time and not getting a return. You don't need hostile players to accomplish that.
I would agree if the instanced content was trivial and gave better rewards, but to expect that defies logic.
The risk is not the same because it cannot be the same until people are under the threat of being looted. It would have to be guaranteed that the material acquisition within the instanced space has a 100% drop rate.
We won't know that for a while.
I never saw an issue with the story arc being instanced, I don't like the idea of any power being in instanced content.
That includes PvP, which arena/battlegrounds are only getting cosmetics and titles at this point.
The risk is not the same because it cannot be the same until people are under the threat of being looted. It would have to be guaranteed that the material acquisition within the instanced space has a 100% drop rate.
If dying in these instances gave a chance for you to lose your loot, similar to the open world, would that make it more acceptable?
Plus, you could potentially be PvP'd and looted at the instance entrance. In fact, that could be quite lucrative for the more predatory PvPers.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
Not if the PvE is actually good.
It seems somewhat obvious to me that you have this pre-concieved notion of what a PvE player is, and you are wrong. How you talk about PvE players comes across as you thinking of all PvE players as basically a charicature of a casual PvE dabbler - a weekend warrior.
Make the assumption that what you are considering "all PvE'ers" is actually kind of the lowest of the low in terms of PvE players, and then you may start to get an idea of how wrong your entire notion in this thread is.
The reality of Ashes is punishing for people who are not conditioned to asset loss, we will lose those players. There is a reason full loot games do not have popularity, because people cannot handle the asset loss no matter how good the content actually is.
PvXrs will be the backbone of this game, people who can handle the asset loss and loss of a city, people who can accept both PvE and PvP occurring simultaneously.
It doesn't matter if Intrepid sifts through all 200+ mmorpg titles to find the most compelling and challenging raid content, designs a compelling and challenging open world raid that rivals any of the instanced raids, so as long as there is threat of players, it'd get talked down. At the end of the day, it's not about the fun of the raid, its not about being fair to other instanced content. No amount of cosmetics, titles, and bragging rights that equal that of Arenas/Battlegrounds is evidently good enough.
Its always been about power, nothing more nothing else. Power without the risk and threat that is persistent through-out the rest of the game.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
Not if the PvE is actually good.
It seems somewhat obvious to me that you have this pre-concieved notion of what a PvE player is, and you are wrong. How you talk about PvE players comes across as you thinking of all PvE players as basically a charicature of a casual PvE dabbler - a weekend warrior.
Make the assumption that what you are considering "all PvE'ers" is actually kind of the lowest of the low in terms of PvE players, and then you may start to get an idea of how wrong your entire notion in this thread is.
what makes good pve? is it the difficulty or something else?
This is subjective in a manner of speaking, but also has some objective elements to it.
The subjective parts are in terms of what is asked of players, the specific mechanics of a fight being enjoyable.
The objective elements are things like encounter progression, quantity of encounters at any given point in that progression, and access to those encounters.
is it better to make pve for the 99% of players or for the top 1% pve players?
Both.
Top end PvE is asperational to players that know they will get there, but also to those that are probably never going to see it. It is important that it is there, it is important that it is talked about, but it is also important that the PvE content that is not top end is supplying those with asperations to take on that top end content with something to do rather than something to want to do.
is it better to make pve for the pvx players and forget about the pure pve players (or pure pvp players)
In a game like Ashes, both.
Ashes needs PvX players, but it will also attract people far more interested in PvP than PvE. The more people you have that are just interested in PvE, the more those that are just interested in PvP have a place. This is on top of the notion that the more PvE players the game has, the longer PvP and PvX players will stick around.
I've said it many times, Ashes will live or die by the PvE population it attracts, not the PvX or PvP population it attracts.
If the game doesn't attract those PvE players, PvP players will peel off from the bottom.
If the PvP-ers at the bottom can defeat PvE players, will those PvE players stay in the game?
I have the feeling somebody will leave anyway, is just that they leave from two bottoms.
Then after a while IS will have to create content for the top PvPers and top PvEers who still play the game.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
Not if the PvE is actually good.
It seems somewhat obvious to me that you have this pre-concieved notion of what a PvE player is, and you are wrong. How you talk about PvE players comes across as you thinking of all PvE players as basically a charicature of a casual PvE dabbler - a weekend warrior.
Make the assumption that what you are considering "all PvE'ers" is actually kind of the lowest of the low in terms of PvE players, and then you may start to get an idea of how wrong your entire notion in this thread is.
what makes good pve? is it the difficulty or something else?
This is subjective in a manner of speaking, but also has some objective elements to it.
The subjective parts are in terms of what is asked of players, the specific mechanics of a fight being enjoyable.
The objective elements are things like encounter progression, quantity of encounters at any given point in that progression, and access to those encounters.
I've said it many times, Ashes will live or die by the PvE population it attracts, not the PvX or PvP population it attracts.
If we go by this logic it's never had a chance.
Have you actually have ever looked up the actual number of PvX players there are in through-out the genre? The roughest estimates available are in the millions.
So if you need to PvP to get to the PvE Boss the game better not make PvE and PvP gear a thing (i bet it will be). To my understand inventory is limited so swaps won't be as easy to bring. But in the end you can just buy everything so wallet warrior will be able to compete or dominate (or RMT like mad).
Instanced PvP should not be a thing either. Arenas removes player from the open world PvP and forces a bad small group PvP balance onto the game. Whiny arena players who demand locks and gate on PvP experience are a bane for any MMORPGs.
I don't want instancing at all, but I accept it.
I'd prefer arenas actually be part of the coliseums in military nodes or give arena players the option to build their own arenas through the housing system.
As someone who also partakes in arenas, I just don't see the need for it to be removed from the world either.
There is a miss conception here. That the 20% of instanced content is all going to be dungeons. Sure there will be instanced dungeons. Latest stream we had Steven said that instanced events will also happen with world bosses they want to control how many players can attack it. So a raid that is boxed for 20 or 40 players. Maybe even for just a team of 8 players.
Adding that to the context of this thread. This means that instanced loot will be meaningful. Could even be best in slot for some items. Only IS knows at this point.
P. S. This whole argument about PvEers. People will stay or they will leave. Steven needs to make the game he is making regurdless. Changing things for PvEers. Would make reworking this game from the ground up.
Honestly I’m still waiting for this unicorn game to be named, because this whole thread is looking like Old Man Yells at Cloud over a handful of instanced content encounters that take place at the conclusion of a dungeon that is already subject to PvP combat.
I’m wondering if OP realizes Node Seiges are also instanced.
I don't want instancing either. And I hope when players die, their gear durability decreases significantly, to compensate that items don't drop.
But I came to the conclusion that node types seem to be created to favor different play styles.
Mayors in military nodes must PvP, divine node mayors must PvE.
Part of the 20% instancing seems intended for divine nodes.
Players who hate this kind of feature can siege and destroy those nodes and in the process, the dungeons will vanish too. If they manage to defend their node, those dungeons will be their reward.
And I like this idea.
I don't want instancing either. And I hope when players die, their gear durability decreases significantly, to compensate that items don't drop.
But I came to the conclusion that node types seem to be created to favor different play styles.
Mayors in military nodes must PvP, divine node mayors must PvE.
Part of the 20% instancing seems intended for divine nodes.
Players who hate this kind of feature can siege and destroy those nodes and in the process, the dungeons will vanish too. If they manage to defend their node, those dungeons will be their reward.
And I like this idea.
Depending on what you consider a PvX player, there are not even close to that many.
We first of all need to exclude people that consider themselves PvP players.
Then we need to exclude people that consider themselves PvE players.
Then it's people that still want good PvE (imposible for this to exist if PvP is an option).
Then people that are not always happy having to fight others for access to content.
If the above is what you consider a PvX player, then yeah, there are probably significantly less than a million out there, and Ashes is not going to attract all of them.
Where the bulk of MMORPG players fall is that they prefer PvE content and are willing to accept PvP content(and perhaps even enjoy it), as long as it doesn't impede that PvE content. This is why games with a PvE focus measure their population in millions, while PvP focused games measure in multiples of a thousand.
Put quite simply, players that primarily want PvP play genres that are better suited to PvP. People wanting specifically PvP in an MMORPG are a niche within a niche, and PvX is a going even one more niche deep.
And your first point in this sentience is very nearly correct - this game has always had a very minimal actual chance at commercial success.
Honestly I’m still waiting for this unicorn game to be named, because this whole thread is looking like Old Man Yells at Cloud over a handful of instanced content encounters that take place at the conclusion of a dungeon that is already subject to PvP combat.
I’m wondering if OP realizes Node Seiges are also instanced.
Man you might even see me in A1 node sieges if you knew what name I went by.
You cited ESO raids as difficult endgame.
There has been open world raids and bosses since the late 90s, start with Asherons Call.
Honestly I’m still waiting for this unicorn game to be named, because this whole thread is looking like Old Man Yells at Cloud over a handful of instanced content encounters that take place at the conclusion of a dungeon that is already subject to PvP combat.
I’m wondering if OP realizes Node Seiges are also instanced.
Man you might even see me in A1 node sieges if you knew what name I went by.
You cited ESO raids as difficult endgame.
There has been open world raids and bosses since the late 90s, start with Asherons Call.
Oh good we finally have a name. Which encounter would you say is the most fine-tuned that you remember in Asherons Call?
Also, read more thoroughly before you post, because I cited ESO as one of the easier MMOs out there, which still has mechanics to some fights that can’t coexist with active PvP interference.
Those open world bosses from the 90s and 00s just don't have the complexity of instanced content today. Even rose tinted nostalgia glasses when looking back at the old games don't make up for the difference.
Its just a different kind of challenge. Ashes is going to have lots of open world content and bosses to challenge. If IS is claiming that 20% of those contents will be inside an instance, its because they want to be able to create a more complex challenge which requires a capped amount of players to balance correctly.
And I am not talking about something that can be handled with simple HP scaling of the boss and damage scaling of its attacks, I am talking about complex mechanics that take weeks or months of patience and wiping and dying and the associated loss of resources from those deaths to figure out how it works, who needs to stand where and the small nuances of the boss room that work together with certain mechanics too. In a game like Ashes where you have to travel through a dungeon to a boss room that learning curve is going to be even more grueling, and will cost a guild a significant investment to just research the fight to be able to even clear it.
Beyond even that, the world has to be in a certain state of development for that dungeon to even be accessible by the area or so I am led to believe by the node system, so there is going to be a pressure for those guilds to spend those resources quickly to clear the stuff while they can get to it.
If pvp is your thing, just beat up on the helpless pve players after they leave the instance and take their loot then. Or attack them on the way to the boss room, because you know for a fact their builds are going to be pve focused for the boss attempt. You will have so many opportunities to fight them outside the instances. Ashes is not a game with a group finder you stay in safe zones and queue into, its a game where you travel the world to get where your going. Fight them in the open world.
If you were instead hoping for the ability to just grief them mid pull, sorry my guy, but that's why some encounters are instanced, so that the boss itself is the challenge, and not you. Again there's plenty of other content people will be trying to farm that you can go mess with if you need the help of the raid boss to kill them. 80% of all content worth farming in fact.
Why would anyone make themselves the Work of (hopefully) tough Instances - if there is not a single gain from it ?
An Ingredient. A Jewel. A whatever. Something People can use. Be it Artisan-Crafter Items or direct Drops. Our neighboring Nodes and Competition won't sleep. Will we be able to invest Hours for Hours into something that will not help us in any form of Power ?
✓ Occasional Roleplayer
✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)
Comments
Yeah dude, because you've been in instanced encounters you can only see it from the instanced pov.
You just think "only the encounter", the PvXer thinks give me the hard encounter + the threat, no need to dumb it down. If you cannot conceive how it would work that's fine, you only want encounters.
I thought Serpentis, Library, etc were executed extremely poorly, like most of the ArcheAge.
PvErs are going to quit the moment they're looted. They're won't stick around for being looted and asset loss every time a city flips.
OW PvXers will be the absolute heart, spine, and lungs of this game.
I have already asked you to provide one example. If you can’t do that just say so, so we can all move on with our day.
Instanced PvP should not be a thing either. Arenas removes player from the open world PvP and forces a bad small group PvP balance onto the game. Whiny arena players who demand locks and gate on PvP experience are a bane for any MMORPGs.
Those PvE players will stay if the PvE is good enough.
People leave games if they keep losing at things they care about (among other reasons - this is the reason we are focusing on here). To a PvP player, that is PvP.
However, to that PvE player, they don't care as much if they lose at PvP, as long as they are enjoying and being successful with the games PvE.
In an MMORPG in which PvP is a core aspect, and losing in PvP has punishment, it should stand to basic reason that not everyone in the game can be there for the PvP.
Not if the PvE is actually good.
It seems somewhat obvious to me that you have this pre-concieved notion of what a PvE player is, and you are wrong. How you talk about PvE players comes across as you thinking of all PvE players as basically a charicature of a casual PvE dabbler - a weekend warrior.
Make the assumption that what you are considering "all PvE'ers" is actually kind of the lowest of the low in terms of PvE players, and then you may start to get an idea of how wrong your entire notion in this thread is.
Wiki states that
A single digit percentage of the population will be capable of defeating certain content.[102]
I always assumed that this content is a PvE instanced content and that will have some rewards too.
If you open such dungeons to any outside interference, it becomes impossible.
Or if you give no rewards, then why would anyone go through the hassle to complete it?
Or why developers would create such content?
Those who can complete such content, most likely can pvp too. Might not be the best PvPers and that is unfair in a PvP world.
Casual PvX players will not get anything. They'll be outside in the open world.
But there will be some instances for small teams too:
Instanced dungeons will also be present and will cater for solo and group questlines.[61]
I assume whatever those players get, will not keep them in those instances for long time.
Steven will observe the game balance and will tune things to work.
Risk vs Reward is important.
Dunno about the new expansion but WOW Dragonflight had BIS gear for open world, PVP, and raids/dungeons. There were 3 sets.
what makes good pve? is it the difficulty or something else?
is it better to make pve for the 99% of players or for the top 1% pve players?
is it better to make pve for the pvx players and forget about the pure pve players (or pure pvp players)
Oh I probably should have been more clear on that, I imagined that all the 8 man groups basically have to wait in a locked room lobby (maybe fighting an endless stream of mobs), untill another group is also ready. This would be to prevent exploiting the system by just coordinating two groups friendly with each other to join simultaniously. It's basically random match making in game.
Your dueling groups is also an interesting concept, perhapse PvE fights in which each sides in a locked room and each time one side defeats a mob it respawns for the other group so they are effectivly trying to overwhelm your oponents with mobs. That's a formula that's been done before to blend pvp and pve.
Their is also the type of 'escape looter' type of game that become popular as of late, multiple groups go into a dungeon from different entrances and kill mobs for loot as the dungeon shrinks but then have to fight over the limited number of 'exit portals' to take their spoils out (lets say the loot must go in special bags which are dropped and fully lootable if you die). Such a system works only with gating of the groups in size and to drop them into the dungeon at the same time. Allowing many places in the world where magical portals to said dungeon exist would make it more likely that your matched up quickly and that you can't game the system with pre-arranged groups that are friendly to each other. Maybe this could even be the gameplay style of the 'Catacombs' assosiated with Religion nodes with all the world religion nodes of the same tier linked together with the highest tier religion nodes having the highest difficulty.
On a general note the success of games like Dark&Darker shows how PvX CAN be done and done well even inside of instancing, it just goes to show how intelectually bankrupt Caeryl's assumptions are because he can not concive of instances being anything but a WoW themepark ride.
Yeah, like the Negalith. Most people will never kill the Negalith, because the opportunity won’t be there for them.
The god/angel would be like:
As for people arguing against rewards... I don't really understand. Yeah, risk is a pillar of the game, but risk of PvP is only one avenue for creating risk. If a rival raid comes through and wipes you out, the end result is basically the same as if the difficulty of the instanced raid wipes you out. The risk is not succeeding, of investing time and not getting a return. You don't need hostile players to accomplish that.
I would agree if the instanced content was trivial and gave better rewards, but to expect that defies logic.
The risk is not the same because it cannot be the same until people are under the threat of being looted. It would have to be guaranteed that the material acquisition within the instanced space has a 100% drop rate.
We won't know that for a while.
I never saw an issue with the story arc being instanced, I don't like the idea of any power being in instanced content.
That includes PvP, which arena/battlegrounds are only getting cosmetics and titles at this point.
If dying in these instances gave a chance for you to lose your loot, similar to the open world, would that make it more acceptable?
Plus, you could potentially be PvP'd and looted at the instance entrance. In fact, that could be quite lucrative for the more predatory PvPers.
The reality of Ashes is punishing for people who are not conditioned to asset loss, we will lose those players. There is a reason full loot games do not have popularity, because people cannot handle the asset loss no matter how good the content actually is.
PvXrs will be the backbone of this game, people who can handle the asset loss and loss of a city, people who can accept both PvE and PvP occurring simultaneously.
It doesn't matter if Intrepid sifts through all 200+ mmorpg titles to find the most compelling and challenging raid content, designs a compelling and challenging open world raid that rivals any of the instanced raids, so as long as there is threat of players, it'd get talked down. At the end of the day, it's not about the fun of the raid, its not about being fair to other instanced content. No amount of cosmetics, titles, and bragging rights that equal that of Arenas/Battlegrounds is evidently good enough.
Its always been about power, nothing more nothing else. Power without the risk and threat that is persistent through-out the rest of the game.
The subjective parts are in terms of what is asked of players, the specific mechanics of a fight being enjoyable.
The objective elements are things like encounter progression, quantity of encounters at any given point in that progression, and access to those encounters. Both.
Top end PvE is asperational to players that know they will get there, but also to those that are probably never going to see it. It is important that it is there, it is important that it is talked about, but it is also important that the PvE content that is not top end is supplying those with asperations to take on that top end content with something to do rather than something to want to do. In a game like Ashes, both.
Ashes needs PvX players, but it will also attract people far more interested in PvP than PvE. The more people you have that are just interested in PvE, the more those that are just interested in PvP have a place. This is on top of the notion that the more PvE players the game has, the longer PvP and PvX players will stick around.
I've said it many times, Ashes will live or die by the PvE population it attracts, not the PvX or PvP population it attracts.
If we go by this logic it's never had a chance.
Have you actually have ever looked up the actual number of PvX players there are in through-out the genre? The roughest estimates available are in the millions.
1 million is 15 million a year for Intrepid.
There goes your entire theory.
I don't want instancing at all, but I accept it.
I'd prefer arenas actually be part of the coliseums in military nodes or give arena players the option to build their own arenas through the housing system.
As someone who also partakes in arenas, I just don't see the need for it to be removed from the world either.
Adding that to the context of this thread. This means that instanced loot will be meaningful. Could even be best in slot for some items. Only IS knows at this point.
I’m wondering if OP realizes Node Seiges are also instanced.
I don't want instancing either. And I hope when players die, their gear durability decreases significantly, to compensate that items don't drop.
But I came to the conclusion that node types seem to be created to favor different play styles.
Mayors in military nodes must PvP, divine node mayors must PvE.
Part of the 20% instancing seems intended for divine nodes.
Players who hate this kind of feature can siege and destroy those nodes and in the process, the dungeons will vanish too. If they manage to defend their node, those dungeons will be their reward.
And I like this idea.
1) Gear degradation is already confirmed
2) Node sieges are instanced PvP
We first of all need to exclude people that consider themselves PvP players.
Then we need to exclude people that consider themselves PvE players.
Then it's people that still want good PvE (imposible for this to exist if PvP is an option).
Then people that are not always happy having to fight others for access to content.
If the above is what you consider a PvX player, then yeah, there are probably significantly less than a million out there, and Ashes is not going to attract all of them.
Where the bulk of MMORPG players fall is that they prefer PvE content and are willing to accept PvP content(and perhaps even enjoy it), as long as it doesn't impede that PvE content. This is why games with a PvE focus measure their population in millions, while PvP focused games measure in multiples of a thousand.
Put quite simply, players that primarily want PvP play genres that are better suited to PvP. People wanting specifically PvP in an MMORPG are a niche within a niche, and PvX is a going even one more niche deep.
And your first point in this sentience is very nearly correct - this game has always had a very minimal actual chance at commercial success.
Man you might even see me in A1 node sieges if you knew what name I went by.
You cited ESO raids as difficult endgame.
There has been open world raids and bosses since the late 90s, start with Asherons Call.
Oh good we finally have a name. Which encounter would you say is the most fine-tuned that you remember in Asherons Call?
Also, read more thoroughly before you post, because I cited ESO as one of the easier MMOs out there, which still has mechanics to some fights that can’t coexist with active PvP interference.
Its just a different kind of challenge. Ashes is going to have lots of open world content and bosses to challenge. If IS is claiming that 20% of those contents will be inside an instance, its because they want to be able to create a more complex challenge which requires a capped amount of players to balance correctly.
And I am not talking about something that can be handled with simple HP scaling of the boss and damage scaling of its attacks, I am talking about complex mechanics that take weeks or months of patience and wiping and dying and the associated loss of resources from those deaths to figure out how it works, who needs to stand where and the small nuances of the boss room that work together with certain mechanics too. In a game like Ashes where you have to travel through a dungeon to a boss room that learning curve is going to be even more grueling, and will cost a guild a significant investment to just research the fight to be able to even clear it.
Beyond even that, the world has to be in a certain state of development for that dungeon to even be accessible by the area or so I am led to believe by the node system, so there is going to be a pressure for those guilds to spend those resources quickly to clear the stuff while they can get to it.
If pvp is your thing, just beat up on the helpless pve players after they leave the instance and take their loot then. Or attack them on the way to the boss room, because you know for a fact their builds are going to be pve focused for the boss attempt. You will have so many opportunities to fight them outside the instances. Ashes is not a game with a group finder you stay in safe zones and queue into, its a game where you travel the world to get where your going. Fight them in the open world.
If you were instead hoping for the ability to just grief them mid pull, sorry my guy, but that's why some encounters are instanced, so that the boss itself is the challenge, and not you. Again there's plenty of other content people will be trying to farm that you can go mess with if you need the help of the raid boss to kill them. 80% of all content worth farming in fact.
An Ingredient. A Jewel. A whatever. Something People can use. Be it Artisan-Crafter Items or direct Drops. Our neighboring Nodes and Competition won't sleep. Will we be able to invest Hours for Hours into something that will not help us in any form of Power ?
✓ Occasional Roleplayer
✓ Kinda starting to look for a Guild right now. (German)