Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here

If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.

Leveling process changes needed.

2»

Comments

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited December 2024
    Githal wrote: »
    When players hit the same milestone in same order is how you create the best guide that people can follow to min max.

    When you are in 1 part of the world and the guide is for some other region with different objectives available, you have to figure some stuff by yourself.
    These two statements are contradictory.

    If there is that best leveing guide that people can follow you talk about in the first statement, people will not find themselves in some other region - they will follow the guide.
    The point is that you dont need unification for every single person to have the same experience. And this system can work exactly because its open world.
    No, it won't work, because it is an open world game.

    If players just chose what ever they like, then they will find themselves falling behind the people that do what is best even more.

    Even worse than that, if people just do what they like, many people may find that the activities they like are no longer providing them with any progression at all, because they have gained all the levels that are on offer from that content type. For example, if someone just finds that they love running dungeons, and just want to run dungeons, unless there is a dungeon for each level (unlikely), they will find themselves unable to do just do what they like before very long.

    You will end up in a situation where people are playing the game and just not progressing - and if they don't actually understand the different leveling system, they won't even understand why they aren't progressing.

    You need to have a VERY good reason to break away from a basic genre-wide system, and the replacement system needs to be more simple and more easy to understand until your new system becomes understood by players.

    It really isn't a system that could work in Ashes. Even if it could work, it is a system that would need to be a part of the games design from the very beginning - not something added to the game half way through development - this is because this system dictates many other aspects of the games design (Ashes would need to drop the notion of different node states opening up different parts of dungeons in order to facilitate this system, for example, otherwise the difference between getting a level of a dungeon that is only partially open vs one that is fully open would be drastic - and if you don't offer levels for partially opened dungeons you remove the ability for players to level up at all via that method).
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Noaani wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    When players hit the same milestone in same order is how you create the best guide that people can follow to min max.

    When you are in 1 part of the world and the guide is for some other region with different objectives available, you have to figure some stuff by yourself.
    These two statements are contradictory.

    If there is that best leveing guide that people can follow you talk about in the first statement, people will not find themselves in some other region - they will follow the guide.
    The point is that you dont need unification for every single person to have the same experience. And this system can work exactly because its open world.
    No, it won't work, because it is an open world game.

    If players just chose what ever they like, then they will find themselves falling behind the people that do what is best even more.

    Even worse than that, if people just do what they like, many people may find that the activities they like are no longer providing them with any progression at all, because they have gained all the levels that are on offer from that content type. For example, if someone just finds that they love running dungeons, and just want to run dungeons, unless there is a dungeon for each level (unlikely), they will find themselves unable to do just do what they like before very long.

    You will end up in a situation where people are playing the game and just not progressing - and if they don't actually understand the different leveling system, they won't even understand why they aren't progressing.

    You need to have a VERY good reason to break away from a basic genre-wide system, and the replacement system needs to be more simple and more easy to understand until your new system becomes understood by players.

    It really isn't a system that could work in Ashes. Even if it could work, it is a system that would need to be a part of the games design from the very beginning - not something added to the game half way through development - this is because this system dictates many other aspects of the games design (Ashes would need to drop the notion of different node states opening up different parts of dungeons in order to facilitate this system, for example, otherwise the difference between getting a level of a dungeon that is only partially open vs one that is fully open would be drastic - and if you don't offer levels for partially opened dungeons you remove the ability for players to level up at all via that method).

    most people are not looking forward to AOC to just do 1 type of content. In contradiction, most like the diversity that AOC provides.

    Also just because you gonna follow a guide to be with 1-2 levels ahead of those who dont follow guide, doesnt mean other players will do the same. Yes there will always be min maxers. and there will always be those who dont like following guides.

    Also if intrepid is following things LIVE, they will catch the guide and nerf/buff other contents, So until you decide to follow the guide it may no longer be the optimal way to level
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    @Lodrig

    Modern RPGs should abandon experience points is an very extremist position.

    To me leveling is not as much a learning process, but a earning process.

    No matter how hard you want to advocate for easy levels. I will advocate for a slower harder grind. It could take a month to hit level 10 and I still would want a slower grind.
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    @Lodrig

    Modern RPGs should abandon experience points is an very extremist position.

    To me leveling is not as much a learning process, but a earning process.

    No matter how hard you want to advocate for easy levels. I will advocate for a slower harder grind. It could take a month to hit level 10 and I still would want a slower grind.

    No one is against slow leveling. As long as the leveling process is fun, engaging, challenging, diverse.

    I am against leveling that feels like a job. Keep grinding this same stuff for 100 hours they said, it will be fun they said...

    And if they make leveling quest farming simulator, or mob grinding simulator - then i would prefer it to be as short of leveling process as possible, since if i wanted to do quest after quest i could do it in any other MMO.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited December 2024
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    I don't think Steven has changed at all. It seems more likely that Jeff had a conflicting vision for ashes that was incompatible with the old school games Steven is inspired by:

    Eve, Lineage 2, Archeage, Star Wars Galaxys.
    Yep. Seems very likely that Jeffrey had a conflicting vision since his old school would be EQ/EQ2 - especially since Steven kept adding more and more features to a game he said would release Before 2020.
    Steven also specifically said in 2018 that Ashes PvP was not like PvP in EvE and ArcheAge because Ashes has Corruption in play across the entire map, rather than permanent areas designated for FFA (No Corruption) PvP.
    But, then Steven added permanent areas designated for FFA (No Corruption) in 2022 - after Jeffrey left.
    Steven also became more obsessed with Risk v Reward.

    So Steven changing his vision is a documented fact.
    More like EvE and ArcheAge is not objectively bad - it's great for gamers who love those games.
    But, that clip from 2017 is obsolete and not particularly helpful in regards to the current plans for post-release Leveling.
    That being said... again... expect the current feel of Leveling to change considerably during and after Alpha 2/Phase 3. Alpha 2/Phase 1 is primarily focused on stability testing; not character progression.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Btw @Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?
    Y'all know how Jamberry Roll.
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Azherae wrote: »
    Btw @Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?

    For me node exp should have nothing to do with players exp. I would even go as far as to say that doing regular quests in the node area should not increase the node level at all. Nor killing mobs, or clearing dungeons and ect.
    Node levels should be entirely from node commissions from the major, building structures in the node, winning node wars and sieges, also from the gold donations from taxes.

    In short: if you want to develop node - then dedicate yourself in developing it, even if it means you might fall behind in other areas. (but not fall behind on levels, I mean fall behind on professions for example)

    So node exp dont depend on player exp, but player exp does... or something like this :D

    Like whatever you do, you should be able to get levels, but If you focus on nodes - then you develop nodes
    you can focus on professions - where you get professions maxed while leveling with it
    if you focus on quests or grinding mobs - then you get quest rewards/ rewards from mob drops that can be- gold, mats, full items
    Caravans - primary gold + node commodities
    Bosses/ dungeons - Bigger risk from dying = better loot drops (but less quantity)
    Exploration - secret maps that may contain unique loot drops needed for professions/node buildings, or some relic equipment for nodes and ect
    Sea content - bosses, quests, under sea chests and ect


    I even like the idea of being able to level up from pvp, but maybe this will be abused too much, so probably better not.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Btw Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?

    For me node exp should have nothing to do with players exp. I would even go as far as to say that doing regular quests in the node area should not increase the node level at all. Nor killing mobs, or clearing dungeons and ect.
    Node levels should be entirely from node commissions from the major, building structures in the node, winning node wars and sieges, also from the gold donations from taxes.

    In short: if you want to develop node - then dedicate yourself in developing it, even if it means you might fall behind in other areas. (but not fall behind on levels, I mean fall behind on professions for example)

    So node exp dont depend on player exp, but player exp does... or something like this :D

    Like whatever you do, you should be able to get levels, but If you focus on nodes - then you develop nodes
    you can focus on professions - where you get professions maxed while leveling with it
    if you focus on quests or grinding mobs - then you get quest rewards/ rewards from mob drops that can be- gold, mats, full items
    Caravans - primary gold + node commodities
    Bosses/ dungeons - Bigger risk from dying = better loot drops (but less quantity)

    I even like the idea of being able to level up from pvp, but maybe this will be abused too much, so probably better not.

    Wouldn't this create a situation where one group is raising the Node, but another is gaining most of the benefits (in this case, assume both groups are Citizens)?

    Other games like this have multiple systems to handle this, but Ashes doesn't have any, are you suggesting that Intrepid change up the incentive structure too?
    Y'all know how Jamberry Roll.
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Azherae wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Btw Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?

    For me node exp should have nothing to do with players exp. I would even go as far as to say that doing regular quests in the node area should not increase the node level at all. Nor killing mobs, or clearing dungeons and ect.
    Node levels should be entirely from node commissions from the major, building structures in the node, winning node wars and sieges, also from the gold donations from taxes.

    In short: if you want to develop node - then dedicate yourself in developing it, even if it means you might fall behind in other areas. (but not fall behind on levels, I mean fall behind on professions for example)

    So node exp dont depend on player exp, but player exp does... or something like this :D

    Like whatever you do, you should be able to get levels, but If you focus on nodes - then you develop nodes
    you can focus on professions - where you get professions maxed while leveling with it
    if you focus on quests or grinding mobs - then you get quest rewards/ rewards from mob drops that can be- gold, mats, full items
    Caravans - primary gold + node commodities
    Bosses/ dungeons - Bigger risk from dying = better loot drops (but less quantity)

    I even like the idea of being able to level up from pvp, but maybe this will be abused too much, so probably better not.

    Wouldn't this create a situation where one group is raising the Node, but another is gaining most of the benefits (in this case, assume both groups are Citizens)?

    Other games like this have multiple systems to handle this, but Ashes doesn't have any, are you suggesting that Intrepid change up the incentive structure too?

    Good question.
    So the easiest way to do this is to give the players with top contribution of node exp on each node level up some huge rewards.
    Maybe even give them better chances to become majors

    i could think of few other solutions, but they will require A LOT changes in multiple systems
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Azherae wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Btw Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?

    For me node exp should have nothing to do with players exp. I would even go as far as to say that doing regular quests in the node area should not increase the node level at all. Nor killing mobs, or clearing dungeons and ect.
    Node levels should be entirely from node commissions from the major, building structures in the node, winning node wars and sieges, also from the gold donations from taxes.

    In short: if you want to develop node - then dedicate yourself in developing it, even if it means you might fall behind in other areas. (but not fall behind on levels, I mean fall behind on professions for example)

    So node exp dont depend on player exp, but player exp does... or something like this :D

    Like whatever you do, you should be able to get levels, but If you focus on nodes - then you develop nodes
    you can focus on professions - where you get professions maxed while leveling with it
    if you focus on quests or grinding mobs - then you get quest rewards/ rewards from mob drops that can be- gold, mats, full items
    Caravans - primary gold + node commodities
    Bosses/ dungeons - Bigger risk from dying = better loot drops (but less quantity)

    I even like the idea of being able to level up from pvp, but maybe this will be abused too much, so probably better not.

    Wouldn't this create a situation where one group is raising the Node, but another is gaining most of the benefits (in this case, assume both groups are Citizens)?

    Other games like this have multiple systems to handle this, but Ashes doesn't have any, are you suggesting that Intrepid change up the incentive structure too?

    Some other solution is to make citizenship connected to the contribution to developing the node
    So for excampl
    Player X and Y both start developing a node and both become citizens. Then player X decides to focus on professions while player Y continues developing the node. At some point Player Z comes who makes more contribution to the node than player X, and since the node no longer has any available citizenship spots, Player Z takes player X spot. And player X is moved down to some of the vasal nodes (moving his freeholds and everything connected)

    ofc there needs to be some point where after you do X amount of contribution to a node at particular level, then you your citizenship cant be overtaken anymore, but to reach this you need some huge dedication,

    And also the citizens that started doing contribution from early node levels should have increased contribution compared to those who start later.
    For example: completing 1 node commission at town level can give you 10 contribution, and completing the same commission at city level gives you 5 contribution. (ofc when node levels up your personal contribution does not reset)
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Btw Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?

    For me node exp should have nothing to do with players exp. I would even go as far as to say that doing regular quests in the node area should not increase the node level at all. Nor killing mobs, or clearing dungeons and ect.
    Node levels should be entirely from node commissions from the major, building structures in the node, winning node wars and sieges, also from the gold donations from taxes.

    In short: if you want to develop node - then dedicate yourself in developing it, even if it means you might fall behind in other areas. (but not fall behind on levels, I mean fall behind on professions for example)

    So node exp dont depend on player exp, but player exp does... or something like this :D

    Like whatever you do, you should be able to get levels, but If you focus on nodes - then you develop nodes
    you can focus on professions - where you get professions maxed while leveling with it
    if you focus on quests or grinding mobs - then you get quest rewards/ rewards from mob drops that can be- gold, mats, full items
    Caravans - primary gold + node commodities
    Bosses/ dungeons - Bigger risk from dying = better loot drops (but less quantity)

    I even like the idea of being able to level up from pvp, but maybe this will be abused too much, so probably better not.

    Wouldn't this create a situation where one group is raising the Node, but another is gaining most of the benefits (in this case, assume both groups are Citizens)?

    Other games like this have multiple systems to handle this, but Ashes doesn't have any, are you suggesting that Intrepid change up the incentive structure too?

    Some other solution is to make citizenship connected to the contribution to developing the node
    So for excampl
    Player X and Y both start developing a node and both become citizens. Then player X decides to focus on professions while player Y continues developing the node. At some point Player Z comes who makes more contribution to the node than player X, and since the node no longer has any available citizenship spots, Player Z takes player X spot. And player X is moved down to some of the vasal nodes (moving his freeholds and everything connected)

    ofc there needs to be some point where after you do X amount of contribution to a node at particular level, then you your citizenship cant be overtaken anymore, but to reach this you need some huge dedication,

    And also the citizens that started doing contribution from early node levels should have increased contribution compared to those who start later.
    For example: completing 1 node commission at town level can give you 10 contribution, and completing the same commission at city level gives you 5 contribution.

    Well, that would be the exact opposite approach of every successful implementation of anything like this I've seen or discussed with anyone...

    So obviously I'm wary of it. It has a pretty potent negative effect on player engagement among the people I know, but if the target audience of Ashes is really competitive, maybe it'd work.

    I don't think the game should go as far as 'Yeah I know you did all that work but then had to go do something IRL so you're a Vassal Citizen now'. Seems more like a 'discomfort logout' moment (even if not a full quit moment) and Ashes is already packed to the brim with those and very few of the opposite.
    Y'all know how Jamberry Roll.
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Azherae wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Btw Githal would your suggestion also be keeping Node EXP entirely separate, or somehow rebalancing it?

    I mean that if group A follows the most efficient path and reaches level 20 and then starts fighting mobs and getting 700 Node EXP per fight, then their Node will automatically 'win' against any Group B that takes their time and only reaches level 12 and only gets 478 Node EXP per fight.

    But if you do the opposite then Group B can get a challenge clamp, so which is it?

    For me node exp should have nothing to do with players exp. I would even go as far as to say that doing regular quests in the node area should not increase the node level at all. Nor killing mobs, or clearing dungeons and ect.
    Node levels should be entirely from node commissions from the major, building structures in the node, winning node wars and sieges, also from the gold donations from taxes.

    In short: if you want to develop node - then dedicate yourself in developing it, even if it means you might fall behind in other areas. (but not fall behind on levels, I mean fall behind on professions for example)

    So node exp dont depend on player exp, but player exp does... or something like this :D

    Like whatever you do, you should be able to get levels, but If you focus on nodes - then you develop nodes
    you can focus on professions - where you get professions maxed while leveling with it
    if you focus on quests or grinding mobs - then you get quest rewards/ rewards from mob drops that can be- gold, mats, full items
    Caravans - primary gold + node commodities
    Bosses/ dungeons - Bigger risk from dying = better loot drops (but less quantity)

    I even like the idea of being able to level up from pvp, but maybe this will be abused too much, so probably better not.

    Wouldn't this create a situation where one group is raising the Node, but another is gaining most of the benefits (in this case, assume both groups are Citizens)?

    Other games like this have multiple systems to handle this, but Ashes doesn't have any, are you suggesting that Intrepid change up the incentive structure too?

    Some other solution is to make citizenship connected to the contribution to developing the node
    So for excampl
    Player X and Y both start developing a node and both become citizens. Then player X decides to focus on professions while player Y continues developing the node. At some point Player Z comes who makes more contribution to the node than player X, and since the node no longer has any available citizenship spots, Player Z takes player X spot. And player X is moved down to some of the vasal nodes (moving his freeholds and everything connected)

    ofc there needs to be some point where after you do X amount of contribution to a node at particular level, then you your citizenship cant be overtaken anymore, but to reach this you need some huge dedication,

    And also the citizens that started doing contribution from early node levels should have increased contribution compared to those who start later.
    For example: completing 1 node commission at town level can give you 10 contribution, and completing the same commission at city level gives you 5 contribution.

    Well, that would be the exact opposite approach of every successful implementation of anything like this I've seen or discussed with anyone...

    So obviously I'm wary of it. It has a pretty potent negative effect on player engagement among the people I know, but if the target audience of Ashes is really competitive, maybe it'd work.

    I don't think the game should go as far as 'Yeah I know you did all that work but then had to go do something IRL so you're a Vassal Citizen now'. Seems more like a 'discomfort logout' moment (even if not a full quit moment) and Ashes is already packed to the brim with those and very few of the opposite.

    Thats why i included the last paragraph. If you were citizen from the first node levels, then it will be really hard to be replaced by anyone starting to grind contribution later on on higher node levels. And also i included that at some point your citizenship becomes permanent.

    But ye i can see that there will be unhappy players after this happen to them. Even tho i think that its well deserved. I mean if someone else is developing the metropolis that you are part of and you did nothing to help, then you dont deserve your spot.


    And yes - this means that if you first focus on professions, then you will be unlikely to get citizenship in any city or metropolis. But this just connect us to the other game systems. You just siege the node, demolish it and then get your spot in the ruins.

    And i dont think this will be as competitive as losing everything from a siege battle.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited December 2024
    Githal wrote: »
    Also just because you gonna follow a guide to be with 1-2 levels ahead of those who dont follow guide, doesnt mean other players will do the same. Yes there will always be min maxers. and there will always be those who dont like following guides.

    The problem isn't one or two levels, the problem is people gaining 10 levels in a day, vs people that don't understand the system simply jot understanding why they aren't leveling at all.

    If you give people milestones to get levels, min/maxing players will only do those tasks - and getting multiple such tasks a day would be a given for organized people.

    Tasks that grant a level need to be able to be done in a single play session by the most casual of players - if this isn't the case, these players simply won't level since leveling is now an all or nothing situation as opposed to something you just work on over time.

    Ashes isn't a game where you can expect people to log off half way through a task and just carry on the next time.

    So, since these tasks need need to be able to be performed by a casual player, organized players will be able to complete many of them in one play session. 10+ is not out of the question, as top end players often achieve 20 - 30 times as much in a day as a casual player (more organization, more knowledge, more friends, more time).

    So yeah, it won't be one or two levels ahead, it will be a handful of days to max level.

    Intrepid can't really alter what you are talking about easily. Since you are talking about one task giving one level, the only way Intrepid could alter this is by making that task easier or harder. With tasks such as exploring a region, there is nothing they can do. With tasks like completing a dungeon, they won't just it out sections of the dungeon if it is too hard, and they can't just add in sections if it is too easy.

    This kind of granular control is what experience is for - if players are gaining too many levels from running a dungeon, they can just lower the experience each mob in that dungeon gives, without needing to alter the content itself.

    Edit to add; as usual, there are multiple people with multiple different views telling you why this won't work. Azherae is looking at it from the perspective of how it will break other systems, I am looking at it from how players will abuse it, and both of us are equally correct.

    The real problem though, is that you have given no reason for why this would be better - it's just kind of a "i think it would be cool if" kind of thing. What I think you are missing is that we aren't saying it could be a good system, we are saying it needs to be a part of the games design from the very beginning, as many other decisions about the game would need to be made taking this in to account.
  • LodrigLodrig Member, Alpha Two
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    @Lodrig

    Modern RPGs should abandon experience points is an very extremist position.

    To me leveling is not as much a learning process, but a earning process.

    No matter how hard you want to advocate for easy levels. I will advocate for a slower harder grind. It could take a month to hit level 10 and I still would want a slower grind.

    My susgestion is completly agnostic to time and difficulty of the leveling process. And if your opinion is always for something to be pushed to an extreme without any thought to what a proper mean is then your the extremist by definition.
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Lodrig wrote: »
    My susgestion is completly agnostic to time and difficulty of the leveling process. And if your opinion is always for something to be pushed to an extreme without any thought to what a proper mean is then your the extremist by definition.

    I know I hold extreme views on this topic.

    I’m also aware that my opinions on most topics tend to be unpopular.

    However, none of this changes my mind.

    What I’m advocating for aligns more closely with the original vision of the game that was presented to the community than what OP is suggesting.

    Ashes aims to be the phoenix of old-school MMORPGs, rising from the ashes of the genre's decline. It’s not trying to become a chimera of new ideas—those games are released every year, and they fail every time.
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • GizbanGizban Member, Braver of Worlds, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    The game should incentivize you to explore the world and do different activities all the time.

    Touch my XP by grinding and I will put you through a window

    Touch touch
  • Githal wrote: »
    Another solution is to make leveling easy, but have level cap that increases each day.
    For example: First day at launch the cap is lvl 10, And after this every day the cap increase by 2 level. So after 20 days you get max level.

    Pros:
    * New players that join later have chance to catch up to older players (not age, but time played :D)
    * Easy to make ALT characters, without the need to spend 100 more hours
    * The time it would take to reach max level will be same as it is now
    * No lifers wont have that great of a level advantage than average working people with few kids
    * More time to spend on other activities like Caravan runs/ developing nodes/ PVP / killing bosses and ect
    * More fair environment where most players will be same level, so all other activities + the pvp will be a lot more fair
    * Chance to experience more of the AOC world, Since atm you rush levels, meaning you skip doing a lot dungeons and other mob zones. Or even if you dont skip them you will be too high level to have a good experience there.
    * You wont feel pressured to farming levels, and wont have the feeling that you are being left behind, just coz you do something you love that is other than grinding levels.

    I think my other solution may be easier to implement, and still serve the required role of removing mindless grinding.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Another solution is to make leveling easy, but have level cap that increases each day.
    For example: First day at launch the cap is lvl 10, And after this every day the cap increase by 2 level. So after 20 days you get max level.

    Pros:
    * New players that join later have chance to catch up to older players (not age, but time played :D)
    * Easy to make ALT characters, without the need to spend 100 more hours
    * The time it would take to reach max level will be same as it is now
    * No lifers wont have that great of a level advantage than average working people with few kids
    * More time to spend on other activities like Caravan runs/ developing nodes/ PVP / killing bosses and ect
    * More fair environment where most players will be same level, so all other activities + the pvp will be a lot more fair
    * Chance to experience more of the AOC world, Since atm you rush levels, meaning you skip doing a lot dungeons and other mob zones. Or even if you dont skip them you will be too high level to have a good experience there.
    * You wont feel pressured to farming levels, and wont have the feeling that you are being left behind, just coz you do something you love that is other than grinding levels.

    I think my other solution may be easier to implement, and still serve the required role of removing mindless grinding.

    Why implement such a convoluted, pointless system that only affects the first 20 days of a game that should have a life of 2000+ days?
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Noaani wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Another solution is to make leveling easy, but have level cap that increases each day.
    For example: First day at launch the cap is lvl 10, And after this every day the cap increase by 2 level. So after 20 days you get max level.

    Pros:
    * New players that join later have chance to catch up to older players (not age, but time played :D)
    * Easy to make ALT characters, without the need to spend 100 more hours
    * The time it would take to reach max level will be same as it is now
    * No lifers wont have that great of a level advantage than average working people with few kids
    * More time to spend on other activities like Caravan runs/ developing nodes/ PVP / killing bosses and ect
    * More fair environment where most players will be same level, so all other activities + the pvp will be a lot more fair
    * Chance to experience more of the AOC world, Since atm you rush levels, meaning you skip doing a lot dungeons and other mob zones. Or even if you dont skip them you will be too high level to have a good experience there.
    * You wont feel pressured to farming levels, and wont have the feeling that you are being left behind, just coz you do something you love that is other than grinding levels.

    I think my other solution may be easier to implement, and still serve the required role of removing mindless grinding.

    Why implement such a convoluted, pointless system that only affects the first 20 days of a game that should have a life of 2000+ days?

    Coz obviously its needed?
    Imagine the game is up for already 2 years. Some new player start from lvl 1, and sees some 50 level players here and there, since with the AOC design the high level stuff wont be that far away from low lvl stuff.
    There are no low level players, because first - no one makes alts, since everyone that was dedicated enough to have 1 already did it, and the rest wont bother with 100 hours grinding. And second - there are no new players that will grind 100 hours just for leveling. And when we consider that those players will need to farm alone it will be a lot more than 100 hours grinding.

    And the other reasons are put in my previous comment. The whole point is to affect the first 20, or they could make it 30-40 days even. since this gives chance to catch up on levels
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited December 2024
    I don't understand your [flawed] reasoning for have alts.
    The reason to have alts in an RPG is to experience the game from the perspectives of different characters who each have different traits, abilities, interests and relationships.
    Alts don't have to reach max Level.
  • nanfoodlenanfoodle Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    The way i see AOC - leveling should be an afterthought.
    Leveling should be in the way of achievements!
    For example you gain 1 level up every time you complete 1 of the following FOR THE FIRST TIME.
    * you complete some big quest story line
    * participate in upgrading node to town / city / metropolis (1 for each)
    * Level up your profession
    * explore region
    * complete caravan run
    * kill world boss
    * clear dungeon
    * win node war / guild war / siege
    * get 50 pvp kills

    and so on. Ofc the number of ways you can get levels should be more than 50. so you are not forced to do an activity you dont like.

    This doesnt mean that the leveling will be fast. It can even be made slower than it is now. just it will be much better than farming the same spot of mobs for hours.

    The game should incentivize you to explore the world and do different activities all the time.

    This is the plan. Some of that is presant. I ding 9 today while fishing. There will be a golden route but I rarely follow in games like this. I like getting distracted and getting rewarded for chasing things I see in the distance. The finding different things for doing so. Events, crafting locations, etc. That's my hope.
  • AirborneBerserkerAirborneBerserker Member, Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    The way i see AOC - leveling should be an afterthought.
    Leveling should be in the way of achievements!
    For example you gain 1 level up every time you complete 1 of the following FOR THE FIRST TIME.
    * you complete some big quest story line
    * participate in upgrading node to town / city / metropolis (1 for each)
    * Level up your profession
    * explore region
    * complete caravan run
    * kill world boss
    * clear dungeon
    * win node war / guild war / siege
    * get 50 pvp kills

    and so on. Ofc the number of ways you can get levels should be more than 50. so you are not forced to do an activity you don't like.

    This doesn't mean that the leveling will be fast. It can even be made slower than it is now. just it will be much better than farming the same spot of mobs for hours.

    The game should incentivize you to explore the world and do different activities all the time.

    This is called milestone leveling. It works well with small groups of people not so much in large groups.

    any number of PvP kills would devolve into to guilds trading kills to level quickly. In fact any PvP rewards would be exploited this way. The only way to stop it would be to either remove it, or make the rewards so difficult to achieve the only way to get the rewards in a timely manner is to use the exploit. There by punishing the players that aren't willing to use the exploit, or excluding one activity entirely. Which means people would be forced to do all the things they don't want to do. So this system would likely not reward the most popular activity. And because we know gamers love to optimize...even at the cost of fun.

    Overall this suggestion is screen doors on submarines/10.*
  • GithalGithal Member
    edited December 2024
    Dygz wrote: »
    I don't understand your [flawed] reasoning for have alts.
    The reason to have alts in an RPG is to experience the game from the perspectives of different characters who each have different traits, abilities, interests and relationships.
    Alts don't have to reach max Level.

    Dont judge by your standards. I for example like diversity, today i may want to play with Bard, tomorrow with summoner and ect. Its not about "experience the game", but more like: play the game with different characters.


    Also imagine you playing 70 hours with 1 class, but then realize that you want to play completely different class as your main. At that point a lot of players will just quit the game instead spending70 more hours grinding
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    At that point a lot of players will just quit the game instead spending70 more hours grinding

    Imagine being so weak of will power that a 70 hours of content is a bridge too far.
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • Vhaeyne wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    At that point a lot of players will just quit the game instead spending70 more hours grinding

    Imagine being so weak of will power that a 70 hours of content is a bridge too far.

    Delusion gone too far in this community.
    Why would i do 70 hours BORING grinding second time? Like it doesnt even matter how good the end game content is. If i have to do something mindless as staying at 1 place killing the same mob for the 800000 time - i am out.
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Githal wrote: »
    Delusion gone too far in this community.
    Why would i do 70 hours BORING grinding second time? Like it doesnt even matter how good the end game content is. If i have to do something mindless as staying at 1 place killing the same mob for the 800000 time - i am out.

    The community is wrong...

    The game is BORING.

    I hope you have fun with whatever you end up doing.

    I am having fun grinding on Ashes myself.

    <3
    TVMenSP.png
    This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
  • Vhaeyne wrote: »
    Githal wrote: »
    Delusion gone too far in this community.
    Why would i do 70 hours BORING grinding second time? Like it doesnt even matter how good the end game content is. If i have to do something mindless as staying at 1 place killing the same mob for the 800000 time - i am out.

    The community is wrong...

    The game is BORING.

    I hope you have fun with whatever you end up doing.

    I am having fun grinding on Ashes myself.

    <3

    Well i hope i have fun in Ashes also, when they change the boring grinding :D
Sign In or Register to comment.