Ashes of Creation must dodge this bullet
Flanker
Member
I've just finished editing and uploaded a detailed video about a topic that, in my opinion, has been undeservingly forgotten. I'm not making this thread for self-promotion purpose - I am genuinely concerned about a bullet that Ashes of Creation must dodge at all cost. Obviously, I will provide a detailed TL;DW below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U535dxJ-ifs
One of my main concerns about Ashes of Creation is leveling speed. According to wiki, it would take approximately 45 days of playing 4-6 hours per day to reach level 50, which is ~225 hours. Which is not much at all and it will inevitably lead to some, or even all problems I described in the video.
1. The average player would reach level 50 within approximately ~2 months. It means the only future updates he will care about are those related to endgame. Therefore, Intrepid will be forced to prioritize endgame content to prevent those players from leaving; this will not stop and will only get worse over time.
2. Those ~2 months might not even be relevant on release. Alpha 2 and Beta phases have no NDA. Therefore, there will be plenty of YouTube guides about leveling up fast.
3. Those ~2 months will be even less relevant post launch: nodes will be more developed, economy will function, market will have everything a player needs. Also, players will be able to get help from friends, guilds etc. They might also get powerleveled by their high-level friends even with current restrictions (for example, level 42 player can get carried in a group of lvl 50 players in high level zones)
4. Official launch may be messy, so at first devs might need to focus on fixing bugs and other issues, instead of new content. Slower leveling would buy Intrepid more time.
5. Slower progression extends the longevity of the game. Simple example: x1 Lineage 2 servers could stay active for years. Servers with x5, x10 or higher rates normally lasted several months at best, despite the fact that players were literally playing the same game. And yes, there were many casual players in Lineage 2 as well.
6. Fast leveling leads to having more alts with different artisan skills. As a result, the whole idea of interdependent player relationships will slowly die. Especially, if we take into account, that artisan level does not really require adventuring level.
7. The faster the leveling is, the more low- and mid-level content players tend to skip. Taking into accounts #1, #2 and #3, the situation will only get worse over time.
8. As a result of #7, the low- and mid-level economy slowly but surely dies over time. New World is a perfect example. Seen the same in Lineage 2 as well.
9. Another point brought up on stream by @Pawkets yesterday: slower leveling will keep taverns with upgraded beds for rested XP more relevant for a longer period of time. After ~ 3 months post-launch a significant percentage of players will reach the level cap and those upgrades won't be really relevant for them anymore.
I also review the main arguments against making the leveling longer, such as:
2. Casual players will be left behind (TL;DW: not really)
3. Complaint about freeholds requiring level 50 (TL;DW: this widespread opinion comes from lack of understanding how freehold system works)
4. Long leveling may be boring (TL;DW: not necessarily, especially if Intrepid delivers what they promised)
5. A widespread belief that the real game and fun only starts at level 50 (TL;DW: true for many other games, not true for AoC)
Ultimate solution that may potentially satisfy everyone:
1. Make the original Ashes of Creation leveling 2-3-5-whatever times longer.
2. Adjust the amount of rested XP received, so that those who play less could have a better XP bonus.
3. Alternatively, after the release, launch servers with x3-x5-x20-whatever rates for those who don't think that arguments from #1 till #8 make any sense; and for those who want to play Ashes only for a few months and then move on to other games.
P.S.Do we really want Ashes of Creation to follow the same fate as a high-rate Lineage 2 server, especially after waiting for it for so many years? Do we want to play Ashes of Creation for a few months, or we want it to captivate us for years, like a true MMO should?
UPDATE: KEY REFERENCES
1. Why I think this is an issue: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/471198/#Comment_471198
2. Statistical data for the example I provided: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/471207/#Comment_471207
3. General topic about leveling speed: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/58957/leveling-speed/p1
4. Local clown @Noaani claimed that "nobody cares and nobody wants longer leveling". I prove why many people actually care about it here, but have those people have no desire to interact with his spam and engage in pointless debates with local population of clowns: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/472821/#Comment_472821
5. Steven talking about leveling speed during the recent interview: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/476064/#Comment_476064
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U535dxJ-ifsOne of my main concerns about Ashes of Creation is leveling speed. According to wiki, it would take approximately 45 days of playing 4-6 hours per day to reach level 50, which is ~225 hours. Which is not much at all and it will inevitably lead to some, or even all problems I described in the video.
1. The average player would reach level 50 within approximately ~2 months. It means the only future updates he will care about are those related to endgame. Therefore, Intrepid will be forced to prioritize endgame content to prevent those players from leaving; this will not stop and will only get worse over time.
2. Those ~2 months might not even be relevant on release. Alpha 2 and Beta phases have no NDA. Therefore, there will be plenty of YouTube guides about leveling up fast.
3. Those ~2 months will be even less relevant post launch: nodes will be more developed, economy will function, market will have everything a player needs. Also, players will be able to get help from friends, guilds etc. They might also get powerleveled by their high-level friends even with current restrictions (for example, level 42 player can get carried in a group of lvl 50 players in high level zones)
4. Official launch may be messy, so at first devs might need to focus on fixing bugs and other issues, instead of new content. Slower leveling would buy Intrepid more time.
5. Slower progression extends the longevity of the game. Simple example: x1 Lineage 2 servers could stay active for years. Servers with x5, x10 or higher rates normally lasted several months at best, despite the fact that players were literally playing the same game. And yes, there were many casual players in Lineage 2 as well.
6. Fast leveling leads to having more alts with different artisan skills. As a result, the whole idea of interdependent player relationships will slowly die. Especially, if we take into account, that artisan level does not really require adventuring level.
7. The faster the leveling is, the more low- and mid-level content players tend to skip. Taking into accounts #1, #2 and #3, the situation will only get worse over time.
8. As a result of #7, the low- and mid-level economy slowly but surely dies over time. New World is a perfect example. Seen the same in Lineage 2 as well.
9. Another point brought up on stream by @Pawkets yesterday: slower leveling will keep taverns with upgraded beds for rested XP more relevant for a longer period of time. After ~ 3 months post-launch a significant percentage of players will reach the level cap and those upgrades won't be really relevant for them anymore.
I also review the main arguments against making the leveling longer, such as:
2. Casual players will be left behind (TL;DW: not really)
3. Complaint about freeholds requiring level 50 (TL;DW: this widespread opinion comes from lack of understanding how freehold system works)
4. Long leveling may be boring (TL;DW: not necessarily, especially if Intrepid delivers what they promised)
5. A widespread belief that the real game and fun only starts at level 50 (TL;DW: true for many other games, not true for AoC)
Ultimate solution that may potentially satisfy everyone:
1. Make the original Ashes of Creation leveling 2-3-5-whatever times longer.
2. Adjust the amount of rested XP received, so that those who play less could have a better XP bonus.
3. Alternatively, after the release, launch servers with x3-x5-x20-whatever rates for those who don't think that arguments from #1 till #8 make any sense; and for those who want to play Ashes only for a few months and then move on to other games.
P.S.Do we really want Ashes of Creation to follow the same fate as a high-rate Lineage 2 server, especially after waiting for it for so many years? Do we want to play Ashes of Creation for a few months, or we want it to captivate us for years, like a true MMO should?
UPDATE: KEY REFERENCES
1. Why I think this is an issue: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/471198/#Comment_471198
2. Statistical data for the example I provided: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/471207/#Comment_471207
3. General topic about leveling speed: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/58957/leveling-speed/p1
4. Local clown @Noaani claimed that "nobody cares and nobody wants longer leveling". I prove why many people actually care about it here, but have those people have no desire to interact with his spam and engage in pointless debates with local population of clowns: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/472821/#Comment_472821
5. Steven talking about leveling speed during the recent interview: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/476064/#Comment_476064
12
Comments
Not sure if you forgot that, but there is no classic "endgame" in Ashes of Creation. A lot of the things you would do on Max Level, you can already start on lower levels. And even more: Things that mattered on lower levels don't just turn irrelevant just because you reached max level.
This ignores that a guide needs a static environment to guide someone through. But lets say somehow someone made a guide to leveling - anyone who decides to copy actions from that is ruining the game for themselves and there is no need to cater to those people (i am deliberately not calling them "players" here).
No, markets will not have "everything players need", just like in the real world, things happen all the time that make something rare or abundant in a certain part of the world despite stuff being IN THEORY available.
Node development also doesn't mean this makes leveling easier, in fact node development could mean it gets more difficult because the areas would see more PvP happening preventing efficient, focused level grinding.
That's what the extensive Alpha and Beta is for.
You might want to take a look at the content release policy as well as the way content in general will be structured in Ashes. You can't just reach max level, fly through all the high level dungeons and call it a day because "you have seen everything". There are going to be access limitations everywhere, established by through the node system as well as through players keeping you away.
That assumes a trivial and extremely simple artisan cycle that you just fly through. Which I don't see being the case.
I honestly don't know what you think level dependent content will be in this game.
Okay, now you lost me. Did you even research the artisan system before making your statement?
As for the rest of your post:
According to the DePaul Univerity:
Increasing the time to level also means increasing the wall that casual players with 11-20 hours per week or less have to climb. Assuming the stats above are accurate 53% of MMO player would already take around 11 weeks at best and around 5 months on average to reach level 50.
I wonder: You talked about motivation. How would an increase of reaching the max level motivate these playres?
I would highly recommend revisiting the information we have on the core systems of the game because IMO you have some very glaring flaws in your base assumptions that make many of your arguments weak if not entirely missing the mark.
Not sure if you forgot that, but there is no classic "endgame" in Ashes of Creation. A lot of the things you would do on Max Level, you can already start on lower levels. And even more: Things that mattered on lower levels don't just turn irrelevant just because you reached max level.
I'm perfectly aware of that. Yet the point still stands and remains relevant.
This ignores that a guide needs a static environment to guide someone through. But lets say somehow someone made a guide to leveling - anyone who decides to copy actions from that is ruining the game for themselves and there is no need to cater to those people (i am deliberately not calling them "players" here)
The point still stands, because even though servers will not be the same, I'm pretty sure there will be strategies to speed up the leveling process significantly. It's 100% gonna be the case for 1-20 levels as starting areas would be the same. And those people you mention - they are still players. They might not share your vision or have the same goals as you, but everyone is free to play however they want.
No, markets will not have "everything players need", just like in the real world, things happen all the time that make something rare or abundant in a certain part of the world despite stuff being IN THEORY available.
This comparison is irrelevant. It is pretty obvious that market 3 months after the launch will have much more to offer than 1 week after the release.
Node development also doesn't mean this makes leveling easier, in fact node development could mean it gets more difficult because the areas would see more PvP happening preventing efficient, focused level grinding.
I fail to see any direct or significant correlation between node level and the amount of PvP going on. This is just an assumption at best, based on... what exactly? Additionally, in vast majority of cases it won't be a problem to avoid PvP.
That's what the extensive Alpha and Beta is for.
Are you trying to tell me that games that went through Alpha or Beta phases haven't ever had any issues post launch? Especially a game that has a scale of Ashes of Creation and numerous systems and mechanics?
You might want to take a look at the content release policy as well as the way content in general will be structured in Ashes. You can't just reach max level, fly through all the high level dungeons and call it a day because "you have seen everything". There are going to be access limitations everywhere, established by through the node system as well as through players keeping you away.
I'm perfectly aware of that. And probably consumed 99% of Ashes-related content that is available on the internet. The point still stands as that's basically an objective fact.
That assumes a trivial and extremely simple artisan cycle that you just fly through. Which I don't see being the case.
I honestly don't know what you think level dependent content will be in this game.
Little to none. I'm talking about exploration, visiting various POIs, farming various dungeons, trying all kinds of artisan skills, completing quests and story arcs in different biomes etc.
Okay, now you lost me. Did you even research the artisan system before making your statement?
Yes, I know either everything or almost everything about it. I don't talk about artisan skills. The point is that the more players reach the level cap, the less active low- and mid-level economy is. I'm not talking about low-tier resources. I used New World as an example, because the vast majority of players there is max level. So the only gear that matters there is basically endgame gear.
Increasing the time to level also means increasing the wall that casual players with 11-20 hours per week or less have to climb.
What wall though? You just wrote it yourself: A lot of the things you would do on Max Level, you can already start on lower levels. - Once again, a widespread belief that "the real fun begins on level 50" is not true for AoC.
I wonder: You talked about motivation. How would an increase of reaching the max level motivate these playres?
I don't recall talking about that at all.
I would highly recommend revisiting the information we have on the core systems of the game because IMO you have some very glaring flaws in your base assumptions that make many of your arguments weak if not entirely missing the mark.
Once again, I've been following Ashes for years and read everything I could get my hands on. I provide real examples for my "base assumptions", so I'm having hard times understanding what that even means.
1; why is it an issue if the bulk of the games players are at the same level, and the developers focus most future updates on that level? I see this as a good thing, not something to avoid.
2; yeah, some people will know how to level faster than others. Why is this an issue?
3; yeah, the first few months will be less important than the time after it. This gives players time to get to know their server and it's population before things get 'real'. This is a good thing.
4; that 200+ hours that Intrepid have given themselves is the longest a fantasy based MMORPG has had for about 20 years. This should be plenty of time to do the bug fixes you are talking about here - it is longer than most games give themselves.
5; no it doesn't. If progression is too slow, people leave the game before getting to the level cap. Intrepid are going to see more pre level cap drop off than any other MMO in decades, due to the speed already being to slow for many.
6; indeed. It's a good thing Ashes has a 200+ hour leveling speed as opposed to the 20 or so hours that many current games have. You could hit the level cap in Archeage in a single play session.
7; this is also true, but I am still unsure why this would be considered bad. Both players and developers are best served if as many players as possible are as close together as possible in both level and over all character power.
8; why is this an issue? Players starting late in the game likely won't need a fully functioning low level economy.
So, you're saying some things that I generally agree could happen with Ashes currently stated leveling speed, the difference being that you see them as issues without stating why you think they are issues.
For the reason I stated above in #1. And in #5 of my original post. The faster the progression is, the sooner the player hits the level cap and gets bored.
First months will be THE MOST important months, as with a high chance that's when there will be the most players. New World made the game better compared to what it used to be 2 years ago. They still have 4k CCU which is a tiny fraction of 900+k players they had on launch.
Planning fallacy. With so many variables, a smooth start would literally be a miracle.
With current AoC design, there is basically no content that is locked behind the level cap. Once again, the idea that "the fun begins only on level 50" is absolutely not applicable to AoC. For other games - yes. For AoC - it's not.
It's still ridiculously low, especially if we keep in mind what I said about the fact that progression will get much faster over time.
Ummm... huh?
Because low- and mid-level economy is a part of general economy system in game that is supposed to be working as intended. When a certain part of it dies, it's a strong sign that something is wrong.
I see them as a huge issue, because I witnessed other games trying to lure "Modern MMO audience" and eventually turning into a garbage. Also, I witnessed the difference in players' behavior and dedication to the same game (that has many similar systems and mechanics and that's the reason why they exist in Ashes) while playing on different servers. If that is not a massive red flag, then I don't know what it.
No worries, that makes sense^^
Since you are aware that there is no endgame in the sense of older MMOs, that means the concern that Intrepid has to focus a lot on "endgame content" cant be relevant. But let's say I agree with you on that for a second: That would mean that it's a problem if an update does not cater to a specific type of player or an update focuses on content that is currently not available.
Which leads me to my conclusion, and disagreement with you, that (1) reaching max level faster than others is not an issue and (2) that Intrepid does not exclusively cater to players who leveled faster than others.
Yes, people are free to play the game the way they want, however, they are not entitled to have Intrepid cater to them just because they decided to speedrun through content. That was their decision and Intrepid will continue to take their time developing new things. So when someone decides to pick up a guide instead of exploring the game themselves, they are doing so in spite of all the information we have of Intrepids development speed, which leaves exactly zero credibility to them when demanding more content they want to be guided through. (IMO of course)
Yes, I agree there will be plenty more, what I disagreed with was really the wording of "market will have everything a player needs". This might speed up the leveling process or it means that while goods are now more abundant, acquiring the gold to get them becoms hard to come by. We don't know yet and the Beta will have to adress that final aspect of balancing, which I think Intrepid already indicated.
More nodes at a higher level = more players being locked out of content they may prefer to the content unlocked by the parent node = more PvP incentives.
Furthermore more Nodes = More economic activity between the nodes = More objectives for highwaymen to attack = more PvP
More high level nodes also mean more high level target in the open world (dungeons as well as part of open world event) of which the content can be contested. This also increases PvP objectives and with it the PvP activity.
No, I am not. I am telling you there is no need to "buy time" when Ashes officially launches.
I think this objective fact entirely misses the point that "progress" in a loop is not a thing and max level content is exactly that: A loop, not an end. Not sure what Lineage 2 did wrong but I don't see a longevity issue from where we are standing (way too far away to make a conclusive judgement), hence I don't really see how this would be relevant as of now. It might be when we actually have information on what max level content looks like and its lacking, but as of now: The design intent does not indicate that to be an issue, is all I am saying.
Not sure what to tell you, the wiki clearly states that gear will have a level requirement so as much as you said you are aware of all the released info about the game, this one seems to have slipped your mind. Additionally ther is lots of one-time-use and access restriction baked into the artisan cake. Which utlimately means to solo through the entire artisan system yourself is a full-time task, that if someone wants to do it, cool, but utterly unrealistic for most players to achieve.
If anything this would indicate that "no life" players can create their own, isolated game loop without relying on and interfering with the game loop of less active players.
So just so I understand your concern correctly: You worry that Intrepids current rate of experience accumulation is set in a way that the content they have been building so far can be skipped to a big degree?
If so - can you give an example of what you would consider a "good" percentage of content to be through with when making it out of a level range?
Like lets say you are Lv 30 and there are currently 4 regions where there is content for characters level 30-40. How much of that content would you say a character should have to go through to reach lv 40?
Are you really aware that it takes low level equipment to make mid level equipment and mid level equipment to make high level equipment? Because that sounds to me that more high level players means more need for low level economic activity.
The wall of reaching max level that presumably is so important that you want to increase it.
Aye, I misread that, my bad.
But if you don't mind: Do you think that it would be particularly motivating to a player active for around 12 hours a week to have to play one character for almost 6 months to reach max level? Or is that irrelavant?
How can you provide examples to your base assumptions if you don't really get what I meant with that, now you got me confused XD
What I was getting at: In my opinion and based on all the core systems that are going to make up Ashes of Creation, I think you are vastly overestimating the importance of levelling compared to everything else. A higher level changes things for a character, yes, but from all I have seen and read not nearly enough to be as concerned about its speed as you are. Low level players and mid level player will not become irrelevant, content will not just be irrelevant, nor will the economy as a whole, the core design aims at ensuring exactly that and unless you can point me to how a lot of max level players render other parts of the game irrelevant despite these core systems being designed the way they are, I can't agree with your concerns.
The whole progression is over in some other mmorpgs when you reach max lvl ... in ashes you have a lot to do that has nothing to do with your lvl ...
building up node, claiming castles, improving your guild hall, traveling merchants and caravans, farming, artesan, (even politics), pvp like guild wars, node wars, arena, duels and whatnot, etc... will be things to do that are most likely not really "over" as u hit lvl 50 ... there are so many different "progression paths" that have nothing to do with your main lvl ... that maxing out a char will most likely take forever for the common dad lol.... and if you are really no lifing this game and are maxed in all possible ways in a char nothing stops you from starting another one .... how many times did i start over in D2 ? its not a special thing for veterans to have multiple chars .... and only lazy bums will complain that they can not respec their chars into different archetypes on the spot for free .... i really hate this catering to low bobs who dont want to invest the time in a game ... i like the idea to be able to do things that other people who didnt invest the time cant do ...
thats why i hate when naked chars lvl 50 will be sold online aso ... or even exp boosts for real money etc .... i hate that stuff ... if i no live a game i want a reward for my investment in time ,.... im oldschool in that regard maybe ...
Flanker, imagine L2's Academy system which would also be supported by the content itself, so that instead of just "high lvl player gives the lowbie some money and maybe gear and says "go level up for us"", the content that the lowbie can do would have some parts where the highbie patron player is welcomed and where that highbie player would gain a better guild benefit for himself.
And ideally the highbie content would have some additional places for lowbies as well, where the additional benefit would only go towards the lowbies. This would also let the newbies see what they can expect at max lvl, in terms of big pve (or potentially even pvp) content.
We already have the mentroship system planned, but we got no info about it, so I think A2 would be a great place to test out different approaches to what I'm suggesting.
Imo this would not only help any future newcomers integrate better into the game, but it would also push high lvl players to interact with lowbies more often and in more meaningful ways, so the community is kept fresh from both sides.
Obviously the benefits would need to be balanced correctly and would most likely need to account for altoholism and stuff, but that's all a testing thing.
Since you are aware that there is no endgame in the sense of older MMOs, that means the concern that Intrepid has to focus a lot on "endgame content" cant be relevant.
It is still relevant. They might add new high level mobs, POIs, dungeons, quests, story arcs, NPCs, etc, Plenty of stuff. If, let's say ~50% of player base is max level and others are in 1-49 range, it's pretty obvious what's gonna be a priority.
That would mean that it's a problem if an update does not cater to a specific type of player or an update focuses on content that is currently not available.
If average max level player is waiting for new patch because he is about to get bored (and there are so many other games that he hasn't played yet) and then new patch brings no new content for him, how do you guess, what happens next?
Which leads me to my conclusion, and disagreement with you, that (1) reaching max level faster than others is not an issue and (2) that Intrepid does not exclusively cater to players who leveled faster than others.
I didn't really get this. Not sure if these conclusions are still relevant after my explanation above.
Yes, people are free to play the game the way they want, however, they are not entitled to have Intrepid cater to them just because they decided to speedrun through content. That was their decision and Intrepid will continue to take their time developing new things. So when someone decides to pick up a guide instead of exploring the game themselves, they are doing so in spite of all the information we have of Intrepids development speed, which leaves exactly zero credibility to them when demanding more content they want to be guided through. (IMO of course)
It doesn't matter. Take any other game - people's behavior is not the same. Any game that has vertical progression will have people rushing to max level. Whether you like it or not, that's the human nature and objective reality.
Yes, I agree there will be plenty more, what I disagreed with was really the wording of "market will have everything a player needs". This might speed up the leveling process or it means that while goods are now more abundant, acquiring the gold to get them becoms hard to come by. We don't know yet and the Beta will have to adress that final aspect of balancing, which I think Intrepid already indicated.
Everything or almost everything - doesn't matter, I assume you understood perfectly what I meant. Speaking of acquiring gold, why would it be harder though? It's an assumption, not a fact. Additionally, if you have any friends or just kindly ask for help in chat - getting the gear on earliy levels wouldn't be a problem at all.
More nodes at a higher level = more players being locked out of content they may prefer to the content unlocked by the parent node = more PvP incentives.
Furthermore more Nodes = More economic activity between the nodes = More objectives for highwaymen to attack = more PvP
More high level nodes also mean more high level target in the open world (dungeons as well as part of open world event) of which the content can be contested. This also increases PvP objectives and with it the PvP activity.
This is not really relevant to level progression. The world is massive and you can find a way to grind anywhere you want. PvP is avoidable in such cases and unlike Alpha 2, I wouldn't expect players randomly PKing strangers.
No, I am not. I am telling you there is no need to "buy time" when Ashes officially launches.
That's typical planning fallacy. With so many variables, a smooth start would literally be a miracle.
I think this objective fact entirely misses the point that "progress" in a loop is not a thing and max level content is exactly that: A loop, not an end. Not sure what Lineage 2 did wrong but I don't see a longevity issue from where we are standing (way too far away to make a conclusive judgement), hence I don't really see how this would be relevant as of now. It might be when we actually have information on what max level content looks like and its lacking, but as of now: The design intent does not indicate that to be an issue, is all I am saying.
Yeah, I think it would be difficult for me to explain and/or for you to understand this point, because you haven't seen that happening with your own eyes. We'll see if any other L2 players visit this thread and share their opinion on this.
Not sure what to tell you, the wiki clearly states that gear will have a level requirement so as much as you said you are aware of all the released info about the game, this one seems to have slipped your mind.
The ordinary gear definitely will. But the artisan gear though? If no, that's an issue. If yes, then it contadicts this part of wiki: Artisan progression does not directly relate to progression in a character's adventuring class
So just so I understand your concern correctly: You worry that Intrepids current rate of experience accumulation is set in a way that the content they have been building so far can be skipped to a big degree?
Correct
If so - can you give an example of what you would consider a "good" percentage of content to be through with when making it out of a level range?
Any number I would write would be an assumption that is based on my subjective perception. Which is not quite useful.
Like lets say you are Lv 30 and there are currently 4 regions where there is content for characters level 30-40. How much of that content would you say a character should have to go through to reach lv 40?
Obviously, the best outcome is if game encourages player to visit all of those regions and that encouragement (not forcing) is strong enough, so that player actually does that.
Are you really aware that it takes low level equipment to make mid level equipment and mid level equipment to make high level equipment? Because that sounds to me that more high level players means more need for low level economic activity.
Resources - yes. Not sure about "equipment" though. Got a source?
The wall of reaching max level that presumably is so important that you want to increase it.
I don't want to "increase" it, I want to avoid the issues that can be easily avoided. All they need to do is just to look at the experience of Lineage 2.
But if you don't mind: Do you think that it would be particularly motivating to a player active for around 12 hours a week to have to play one character for almost 6 months to reach max level? Or is that irrelavant?
It depends on the game. If that's a monotonous grind, I wouldn't expect many players to enjoy it. If Intrepid delivers everything they promised - then I don't care if reaching level 50 would take 5000 hours as I will enjoy it on any level, be it level 12 or 27. Once again, it's not my assumption, I've seen that happening in Lineage. People played for years without even reaching the level cap. Why? Because they had fun despite the fact that Lineage 2 was extremely grindy.
It would be a great idea and a decent system. The thing is, I still want to play Ashes of Creation in this century, preferably.
Exactly, you just proved my point.There are many things to do in Ashes of Creation and they are not locked behind the max level. Which means, it doesn't really matter whether it takes 200 or 1000 hours to reach it.
This is just basic logic.
The part you have not yet mentioned is why you think this is a bad thing, when it is in fact a good thing.
If a game has 10,000 characters online, and 2,000 of them are in each 10 level band, the game may as well be slpit up in to 5 different games, one for each 10 levels. There is very little in terms of good interaction that happens between players of different level ranges, and so the game is better off if players are closer together.
Your point about "well why have levels then" is actualyl spot on, and if this was the only consideration at all, there would be no point at all in levels.
However, levels provide an actual function, and while I wouldn't go as far as to say they are required, they are by far the best system anyone has developed to perform the specific function that they perform. The trick is to provide that function, but to not let leves remain in the way of players meaningfully interact with each other - which only really happens when they are a similar level. There is no evidence that MMORPG players leave games when they hit the level cap. In fact, the few games that have published figures (notibly not any PvP focused games) all have between 90 and 95% of all in game time spent on characters that are in some way at the level cap.
If your concern is that players will leave when they hit the level cap, you can literally just drop that concern completely. More people doesn't mean most important.
Almost every MMORPG has significantly more players in it's first few months than it has afterwards. This is normal and expected. Where did I say there would be a smooth start?
I said that 200 hours is significantly longer than any other similar game has had in decades, so this need not be a concern. These two things are not connected.
If progression is too slow, people leave a game because they do not feel they are progressing as fast as they want (obviously). It has almost nothing at all to do with how much content they have at those levels. It is literally faster than any game of recent memory.
To most of Ashes players, it will be the longest leveling process they have ever had, with only games released before they were born being longer. More players at the same or similar level means more meaningful player interaction.
This is a good thing, as meaningful player interaction keeps players in games. No it isn't.
If a segment of the economy is dying, it suggests that this specific part of the economy is no longer needed.
It would be an issue if a part of the economy that died suddenly found use but couldn't come to life, but an unused portion of the economy being dead is not a bad thing. All it is, as you should be able to tell, is a sign that there are fewer lower level players on the server. Which games is it you are talking about here?
In addition to the academy system, the Manor system from L2 can be a nice thing to adapt in AoC and create a link between low and high level players.
The manor system could be only used by academicians ofc.
And they will add content of that sort. But modifying the leveling speed will not have any significant change at this point, unless it is so drastic that it will make reaching max level almost unattainable for more casual players who might play around 10-12 hours a week.
This is why I said: The game loop Intrepid designs ensures that players just don't get bored within a few weeks after reaching max level.
I tell you what I like: I like that Steven has clearly said that if people do not like the core principles with which the game is designed, which includes a lot of horizontal progression and game play loops, then Ashes is not for them.
I get them some people love to destroy the intent of a game design and let someone else pilot them to max level, but Intrepid and Steven show no interest to suck up to players like this who are just after "big number", the game goes beyond way vertical progression and if someone get board because the vertical progression stops... they should have been well advised to read what they bought into.
Sorry I don't quite follow here. You think that people will just hand out gear to newbies for asking nicely, even though that gear will be a necessary component for higher level gear?
Why would it be harder: The more players can wear gear of a certain level, the more demand is there for everything in the production line below that, so the prices rise for those goods in higher demand, but that doesn't make gold acquisition any easier. Hence more vertical progress creates more demand for economic activity along the entire production chain - and if that demand is not satisfied, prices for goods in that chain will keep rising. Basic economics.
And this is what I meant with "base assumptions". You think you can just comfortably hide away from PvP and powergrind to max level. You assume that reaching max level is highly relevant. I would argue: Both of these assumption are false.
And a bumpy start is so relevant that leveling has to be slower?
Not even then. Because Artisan progress is not dependent on the artisan gear. The wiki clearly states what artisan gear does: "Artisan gear boosts artisans in their gathering, processing, or crafting professions while they are wearing the gear." Meaning it is entirely optional to improving your proficiency / artisan skill level.
It also doesn't say anything about EVERY artisan class being ENTIRELY independent from adventurer level. No level 1 player will be able to go increase their gathering skill level by going to the highest level open world dungeons where the highest quality materials have to be gathered.
Oh. Boy.
How convenient.
I don't think that is obvious at all, in fact that sounds to me like a game that makes it a pain in the neck to create and level an Alt.
Yeah, the Wiki. Specific and necessary crafting materials for higher tier items can only be obtained through the deconstruction of lower-tier items. This is designed to keep lower tier crafted gear relevant through progression and across expansions.
If the things that make it enjoyable to reach max level are still relevant at max, why increase the time to reach max level in the first place?
imo this means excatly that you assume there is no progression left in the game with lvl 50 and "Endgame content" needs to fill the void that comes after lvl 50 that makes people quit the game ....
im not proving your point ... why does it matter if you are doing stuff with lvl 50 or not ... excatly .. it doesnt ... so why not doing it with lvl 50 ... your whole point doesnt really make sense imo ...
if you feel that people are "done" with lvl 50 and "leave" as you assumed .... people dont seem to grasp what else they can do in the game, so missed out on many aspects of the game ... you assume that people will leave bc they reached max lvl and have nothing left to do "unless Endgame" .... hence you assume that they dont feel like there is something left to do worth while ..... my point is that your whole assumption on people leaving bc of reaching lvl 50 makes no sense in a game that has so many progression paths and moving interacting systems that dont really have something to do with your lvl ....... i say your "max lvl means leaving" assumption makes no sense ....
Reaching max Adventurer Level is not the end of the game.
Ashes has several other progression paths besides just Adventurer Level.
Also, Ashes is not a static game. Content changes - new content is introduced to the world as Nodes rise and fall.
Expect new content to be added every 3 or 4 months.
Seasonal updates are the current trend. As opposed to waiting 18+ months for an Expansion.
Even most MMORPG players are some form of Casual (Casual-Time, Casual-Challenge or both).
Most players will not be playing 4-6 hours per day.
I think the average time to max Adventurer Level will be closer to 3 months.
There should not be enough Sieges and Node rebuilds in that time for us to have exhausted all the original (pre-update) content in 3 months.
And we will likely see brand new content dropped in by the devs every 3 or 4 months.
And like I said in my previous comments: There is no endpoint called "engame", max level leads into a loop and those have no end point.
So you will not make a lvl Guide right? Not data mine every piece to hell and back?
"The Ultimate Guide to Ashes of Creation Alpha 2"
Am I supposed to be or something? Cuz if that was the purpose of this message, you need to do better. If it wasn't, then I probably didn't understand the meaning of this.
Most likely I will, because that's how content creation works. You should either entertain the viewer, or provide the value. Or both at the same times.
From the wiki: The aspiration is to have more things to do in the game than a player has time to do.
Steven quote, also from the wiki: Endgame to me communicates static. It is static structure. Okay, you've entered this loop, now and this is your end-game loop that you will repeat over and over. Whereas instead, the approach for Ashes is you have now reached a point where all of these loops are relevant; and the loops are present to you depending on how the community engages the world. And it's up to you to identify the most promising loops because you have a finite amount of time and resources in which you can engage with them. And that's then where strategy becomes a part of the picture: How will I choose to engage with these loops to maximize my return, or to maximize the specific benefit I wish to bring in individual, group, myself, or guild.
I'm not sure why I would stop playing the game just because I'm level-capped when there are plenty of things to do.
Except it does matter. The psychology behind gaining levels and reaching milestones affects whether or not someone feels that they have accomplished something with the time spent. As has been pointed out, six months is still a pretty decent amount of time, but with skill points being received at intervals within a level, the planned system will probably work out pretty well.
This is kind of a side tangent, so feel free to disassociate this part from the rest of this post, but I also think the numbers for the average player hitting the level cap are a bit off. I don't think it will take the average person ~2 months to reach the level cap (obviously still using the 45 days, 4-6 hours from the wiki). The average on a bell curve of players will probably put it closer to 3 months. Most ideas on length of time look at the overall hours and split it by time played, which omits the fact that, for example, someone who plays in 2 7-hour sessions is going to get more done than someone who plays in 7 2-hour sessions. Like I said, totally random side tangent.
You completely miss one of the crucial points that I initially made and the example with rated servers in L2, which I'm pretty sure applies to other games with private servers as well. Basically, when two groups of players play the same game, those who play it on a server with lower rates - end up playing it significantly longer, no matter if they are casual or hardcore. You don't take into account a psychological aspect of it, specifically "not achieving something that you can achieve".
Ugh, thank you for repeating exactly what I say in the video. I believe I already stated above that I'm aware of that
Exactly. With the way the system is built, it pretty much doesn't matter whether reaching the next level takes 3 or 7 hours. It will be rewarding. Additionally, the more difficult a milestone is, the more satisfaction you get when you hit it.
2 or 3 months is not a significant difference on a grand scheme of things. 2 or 12 would be one, for example
And they will add content of that sort. But modifying the leveling speed will not have any significant change at this point, unless it is so drastic that it will make reaching max level almost unattainable for more casual players who might play around 10-12 hours a week.
So how does those two points co-exist in your head? You say that level doesn't matter and then you say that "casual players won't reach the max level"?
This is why I said: The game loop Intrepid designs ensures that players just don't get bored within a few weeks after reaching max level.
Exactly. Which means that they won't get bored before reaching that AS WELL. Additionally, they would still have +1 thing to do which XP farm.
I tell you what I like: I like that Steven has clearly said that if people do not like the core principles with which the game is designed, which includes a lot of horizontal progression and game play loops, then Ashes is not for them.
I get them some people love to destroy the intent of a game design and let someone else pilot them to max level, but Intrepid and Steven show no interest to suck up to players like this who are just after "big number", the game goes beyond way vertical progression and if someone get board because the vertical progression stops... they should have been well advised to read what they bought into.
I heard that a lot of times as well and I totally agree with Steven's vision. Yeah if you cared to watch the video, you'd also hear him saying "You can't fix level rushing in a game with vertical progression"
Sorry I don't quite follow here. You think that people will just hand out gear to newbies for asking nicely, even though that gear will be a necessary component for higher level gear?
Don't know what you mean by "a necessary component for higher level gear", but other than that - yes. If done properly, that even worked in much more toxic environments compared to AoC community.
Why would it be harder: The more players can wear gear of a certain level, the more demand is there for everything in the production line below that, so the prices rise for those goods in higher demand, but that doesn't make gold acquisition any easier. Hence more vertical progress creates more demand for economic activity along the entire production chain - and if that demand is not satisfied, prices for goods in that chain will keep rising. Basic economics.
I'm aware of this. Yet the reality of in-game economy might end up being different. I hope it won't because saying "told you" wouldn't give me much pleasure, if that happens.
And this is what I meant with "base assumptions". You think you can just comfortably hide away from PvP and powergrind to max level. You assume that reaching max level is highly relevant. I would argue: Both of these assumption are false.
Yes, in a 1200sq km world - that wouldn't be a problem at all.
Speaking of reaching max level being relevant - listen to Steven saying that, he shares the same opinion.
And a bumpy start is so relevant that leveling has to be slower?
Have you even read my previous post? Yes, that's one of the reasons. Not the most important reason, but the point still stands. The further players progress in game, the more potential issues may arise. Pretty obvious.
Not even then. Because Artisan progress is not dependent on the artisan gear. The wiki clearly states what artisan gear does: "Artisan gear boosts artisans in their gathering, processing, or crafting professions while they are wearing the gear." Meaning it is entirely optional to improving your proficiency / artisan skill level.
Then you just proved my point and people will end up having level 1 Grandmaster alts.
It also doesn't say anything about EVERY artisan class being ENTIRELY independent from adventurer level. No level 1 player will be able to go increase their gathering skill level by going to the highest level open world dungeons where the highest quality materials have to be gathered.
Bruh, that's exactly what I say in video. All those "dangers" apply exclusively to gathering that can be done on main character. Processing and crafting have no such restrictions.
How convenient.
That is a true though. I don't want to use random numbers out of my head while attempting to prove the point. It's not the way a proper discussion should go.
I don't think that is obvious at all, in fact that sounds to me like a game that makes it a pain in the neck to create and level an Alt.
How... does it... make any sense though?
Yeah, the Wiki. Specific and necessary crafting materials for higher tier items can only be obtained through the deconstruction of lower-tier items. This is designed to keep lower tier crafted gear relevant through progression and across expansions.
Well, that's still materials. But I get your general point. Not sure that this factor alone would be enough though.
If the things that make it enjoyable to reach max level are still relevant at max, why increase the time to reach max level in the first place?
f there is plenty of things that make leveling enjoyable, then what's your issue with prolonging that sweet experience? Especially in a game like AoC with no content locked behind level requirements?
Secondly, I disagree entirely with nearly everything in it that isn't just the obvious observations at the start.
The only type of 'slower leveling' I'd accept in Ashes is the BDO style, where leveling from level 44-50 is just an incredible slog that feels practically pointless to do unless you're that person who wants to get Server First for like, level 48.
First of all, Level Sync/Level Cap is a thing in MMOs. Whether people like it or not, you can do it, and that means you can spend more time adding Level Capped content and max level players will still interact with it. Yes, there's a psychological effect that some players experience where they don't want to do this, but in a PvX game, I believe this effect is lessened.
Players always drop off, but in Ashes, lower and mid level content changes its location on the map, and the goals of the players can change with it. They have the option, as Nodes progress, to just wholesale raise the level of content. Node A vassalizes node B, Node A's enemy population is now higher level, Node B remains the source of lower level content. But eventually Node A goes up to whatever the max is, and Node B follows, until there is less lower level content on the map, and no one minds.
Bear in mind that this is just 'the mobs themselves are stronger and use different abilities and tactics'. So the player who has learned to fight the level 20 version of something is then challenged by the new abilities of the level 30 version of the same thing. If you don't level at a decent pace, you have a higher difficulty as a designer 'adding more challenge to the mobs'.
The mention of slowing down to make sure that the max content is encountered in 'waves', is already achieved with the current leveling speed, because Nodes are not planned to rise that fast. People might hit the level, but not unlock the content.
Any assumption that things become considerably faster in the leveling phase because of developed Nodes is weirdly double-sided. If Nodes are developed, why should people level slower anyway? Those people are 'headed toward the same current content'. And the relatively rapid changes in the world would mean that no one 'knows' how to level faster, outside of what Intrepid already mostly 'planned' for them to know. It's not that this isn't a 'problem' at all, it just solves itself.
Achievements tie into leveling, but they're not really directly connected to it. Leveling is generally either just a grind, in which your achievement is 'gaining a new way to fight or a more powerful opponent', or it's a series of adventures. MMOs generally give people a 'tangible' reward for their adventures, but in a game where economy is supposed to matter, you can't just hand out rewards, so 'enough exp to get half a level' is the next best thing.
I think in the end, you have a preference for it to be longer than it is which is fine, but the problems presented have thresholds of speed. There's a specific point at which these things become problems, and '270 hours' is nowhere near it, particularly if leveling is a pretty standard exp curve (i.e. you reach level 30 within approx 100 hours, level 40 around 170 hours, level 50 at the 270-ish mark).
As for Freeholds, that's also not a question of leveling speed. Freeholds will go to the highest level player a lot of the time, but if it didn't... then what? More random people holding them and then not sticking with the game? Freeholds as a whole are messed up for many reasons, but leveling slower won't resolve any of them.
I'm reminded that this sort of thing works way better as a Reaction Video, but eh, I don't make those.
Agreed, but that would require Intrepid to do multiple things very poorly, in places where it is relatively well understood how to not do them poorly even if you don't want to go all the way to 'modern MMO dopamine rollercoaster' design.
There are unfortunately very few things on the forums where people get to the point of discussing real problems. A large part of this is on Intrepid for showing us vague concepts that make people worried about basic problems.
But, so that I'm not just 'claiming there's no problem', I'll throw out a solution/suggestion for 'expansion content'.
"After a certain Node reaches Town stage, an Ancient arrives and takes over a POI, applying a powerful magical field that limits everyone who comes into the POI to the stats of a level 30 player. There's a camp there, where you can 'respec' to a temporary level 30 state. The game saves this spec for you separately.
To revert this POI to 'uncapped', players must exp in the POI and fight bosses, and so on. Gear over level 30 is wearable, it even has full power, but it loses durability 3-5x as fast, so you wouldn't want to wear it except for the boss fight. The boss fight isn't particularly rewarding, it just provides some of the materials needed to make the thing that will revert the POI and drive off the Ancient."
Goal of the event? Some people want to explore the POI at full power. Or just a story arc. Or it can be entirely noncritical and you could just leave it that way except for the fact that it might eventually start to spread corruption.
I give this example not because I want to see it, but as a demo of how relatively trivial it is to solve these problems at the level we tend to define and discuss them.
Which is why I still enjoyed your video. It's a good overview of the problems a game like this can have. I just disagree that the conditions that would lead to that problem, are the ones we've been told we will get.