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.
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.
AOC Guild Summit - Server Discussion Recap
Srixun
Member, Alpha Two
Hey guys! We have a small discord setup of multiple Guild leaders + reps to help get some more focused data to intrepid on issues if we can. If you'd like to be a part of this conversation, please dm me on discord. (Srixun) Currently we are looking at guilds that are 50+
Toxicity or hazing are not allowed. This is the Adults table.
Each guild gets 3 Reps (Gm, 2 officers) no exceptions. If you don't want to participate, no big deal but we're just trying to ensure bullet pointed feedback for Intrepid to ensure ashes is what we all want it to be.
Posted here to forums so the general populace can also leave feedback on said topics.
Full Breakdown of the Discord Conversation on Server Structure, PvP, and Off-topic Game Mechanics
---
Server Structure: Mega Server vs. Multiple Servers vs. Full Wipe
#### Arguments for a Mega Server (12 Users)
Better for testing and data collection: Keeping everyone on one server allows Intrepid to see real issues, balance PvP, and fix exploits effectively.
Segregation is not the solution: If players split into different servers based on playstyle (PvE, PvP, RP), Intrepid won't get the necessary feedback to balance the game properly.
One world, one community: The game’s vision is for a living, dynamic world where interactions matter—splitting servers kills that.
PvP, PvE, and RP must co-exist: The game is designed to be PvX (not PvP-only or PvE-only), so forcing separation isn’t true to the game’s philosophy.
🔹 Counterpoints:
This has led to excessive toxicity and is driving away new players.
Vyra has already lost significant testers due to PvP exploitation.(Lyneth has also lost alot of player activity)
The server stability is questionable—previous large fights have crashed the server.
---
#### Arguments for Multiple Servers (13 Users)
Different servers allow different playstyles: PvE players can avoid griefing, and PvP players can enjoy unrestricted combat.
Toxicity and griefing are major concerns: A single server will push casuals and small guilds away.
The map isn’t large enough for a mega server: With limited space and server instability, a single server may not work long-term.
Two to three servers could be optimal:
A PvP-heavy server for those who want unrestricted PvP.
A balanced server for mixed gameplay.
A PvE-heavy server for those who prefer a more cooperative experience.
🔹 Counterpoints:
This weakens the player economy and node interactions.
Some mechanics need PvP presence to function properly (e.g., node conflicts, sieges, mayoral elections).
If server populations dwindle, certain mechanics will fail.
---
#### Arguments for a Full Server Wipe (9 Users)
The game is already in disarray: Vyra has been overrun with exploits, war dodging, and server politics.
A fresh start is necessary for meaningful testing in Phase 3.
A wipe allows new guilds to catch up: Right now, dominant guilds have already shaped the server, making it hard for new players to test effectively.
🔹 Counterpoints:
A wipe without fixes will just repeat the same problems.
Some players argue that wipes should only happen once game mechanics are refined.
---
PvP Toxicity vs. Intended Gameplay
#### Concerns About PvP Toxicity (18 Users)
Larger guilds are abusing war mechanics to dominate smaller guilds and make participation difficult for new players.
PvP mechanics enable griefing rather than meaningful competition:
Dodging fights by logging off.
War declarations during RP events just to disrupt.
Excessive camping and griefing in respawn areas.
Casual and small guilds struggle to exist due to constant war declarations.
Many players have already quit because the environment is too hostile.
🔹 Counterpoints:
PvP is part of the game, and avoiding it should not be an option.
Players should use diplomacy and alliances instead of asking for rule changes.
Self-policing works—guilds should create fair play agreements.
---
#### Arguments That PvP Should Remain Unrestricted (8 Users)
It’s a PvX game, not PvE or PvP-exclusive: Complaining about PvP in a PvX game is pointless.
Griefing is not an issue, just player behavior: The game should not limit freedom just because some people abuse mechanics.
Smaller guilds should form alliances: The game is designed to encourage social play.
🔹 Counterpoints:
This ignores the problem of exploit abuse.
Forcing alliances is not a solution—some players prefer independent small guilds.
---
Exploits and System Fixes Needed
#### Most Commonly Reported Issues (21 Users)
War dodging: Large guilds log off or manipulate war declarations to avoid fights.
Mayorship abuse: Players are dropping citizenship to manipulate elections.
Guard AI is useless: NPC guards do nothing to prevent griefing during node wars.
Caravan and world boss abuse: Mechanics are being exploited to disrupt fights unfairly.
🔹 Suggested Fixes:
Cooldowns on war declarations to prevent instant PvP.
Better NPC guards to stop griefing.
Election system improvements to prevent abuse.
🔹 Counterpoints (3 Users Disagreeing):
Fixing too many of these issues may remove meaningful PvP.
Guild wars should stay unrestricted to maintain a dynamic world.
---
Balance for Smaller Guilds
#### Smaller Guilds Need More Support (14 Users)
The game is currently unbalanced in favor of large guilds.
Small guilds have no way to protect themselves outside of diplomacy.
Many small guilds are quitting, reducing server diversity.
🔹 Proposed Fixes:
Adjust PvP systems so large guilds don’t dominate everything.
Introduce mechanics that help smaller groups compete.
---
#### Arguments That Small Guilds Should Adapt (9 Users)
The game is designed around alliances—small guilds need to find protection.
Survival requires adaptation, not artificial balancing.
There are already ways to deal with bigger guilds through cooperation.
🔹 Counterpoints:
Not everyone wants to be forced into alliances just to survive.
---
Intrepid’s Role in Fixing Issues
#### Arguments for More Developer Intervention (16 Users)
Exploits need to be patched ASAP rather than relying on community policing.
Toxic behavior should be discouraged through game mechanics.
Systems should be adjusted to ensure fairer fights.
🔹 Suggested Fixes:
War cooldowns and better anti-griefing mechanics.
Balancing election mechanics to prevent abuse.
More active developer feedback collection.
---
#### Arguments for Community Self-Policing (10 Users)
The player base should handle these issues themselves rather than relying on the devs.
Diplomacy and social contracts are part of the game’s intended experience.
Restricting mechanics makes the game less dynamic.
🔹 Counterpoints:
Self-policing does not work when exploit abuse is widespread.
Devs need to actively balance the game to prevent population drop-off.
---
Final Summary
13 users want multiple servers.
12 users want a mega server.
9 users want a full wipe (but are split on server type after).
18 users believe PvP toxicity is a major problem.
21 users say war dodging, mayorship abuse, and PvP mechanics need fixes.
14 users think small guilds need more support.
16 users think Intrepid should step in more.
Toxicity or hazing are not allowed. This is the Adults table.
Each guild gets 3 Reps (Gm, 2 officers) no exceptions. If you don't want to participate, no big deal but we're just trying to ensure bullet pointed feedback for Intrepid to ensure ashes is what we all want it to be.
Posted here to forums so the general populace can also leave feedback on said topics.
Full Breakdown of the Discord Conversation on Server Structure, PvP, and Off-topic Game Mechanics
---
Server Structure: Mega Server vs. Multiple Servers vs. Full Wipe
#### Arguments for a Mega Server (12 Users)
Better for testing and data collection: Keeping everyone on one server allows Intrepid to see real issues, balance PvP, and fix exploits effectively.
Segregation is not the solution: If players split into different servers based on playstyle (PvE, PvP, RP), Intrepid won't get the necessary feedback to balance the game properly.
One world, one community: The game’s vision is for a living, dynamic world where interactions matter—splitting servers kills that.
PvP, PvE, and RP must co-exist: The game is designed to be PvX (not PvP-only or PvE-only), so forcing separation isn’t true to the game’s philosophy.
🔹 Counterpoints:
This has led to excessive toxicity and is driving away new players.
Vyra has already lost significant testers due to PvP exploitation.(Lyneth has also lost alot of player activity)
The server stability is questionable—previous large fights have crashed the server.
---
#### Arguments for Multiple Servers (13 Users)
Different servers allow different playstyles: PvE players can avoid griefing, and PvP players can enjoy unrestricted combat.
Toxicity and griefing are major concerns: A single server will push casuals and small guilds away.
The map isn’t large enough for a mega server: With limited space and server instability, a single server may not work long-term.
Two to three servers could be optimal:
A PvP-heavy server for those who want unrestricted PvP.
A balanced server for mixed gameplay.
A PvE-heavy server for those who prefer a more cooperative experience.
🔹 Counterpoints:
This weakens the player economy and node interactions.
Some mechanics need PvP presence to function properly (e.g., node conflicts, sieges, mayoral elections).
If server populations dwindle, certain mechanics will fail.
---
#### Arguments for a Full Server Wipe (9 Users)
The game is already in disarray: Vyra has been overrun with exploits, war dodging, and server politics.
A fresh start is necessary for meaningful testing in Phase 3.
A wipe allows new guilds to catch up: Right now, dominant guilds have already shaped the server, making it hard for new players to test effectively.
🔹 Counterpoints:
A wipe without fixes will just repeat the same problems.
Some players argue that wipes should only happen once game mechanics are refined.
---
PvP Toxicity vs. Intended Gameplay
#### Concerns About PvP Toxicity (18 Users)
Larger guilds are abusing war mechanics to dominate smaller guilds and make participation difficult for new players.
PvP mechanics enable griefing rather than meaningful competition:
Dodging fights by logging off.
War declarations during RP events just to disrupt.
Excessive camping and griefing in respawn areas.
Casual and small guilds struggle to exist due to constant war declarations.
Many players have already quit because the environment is too hostile.
🔹 Counterpoints:
PvP is part of the game, and avoiding it should not be an option.
Players should use diplomacy and alliances instead of asking for rule changes.
Self-policing works—guilds should create fair play agreements.
---
#### Arguments That PvP Should Remain Unrestricted (8 Users)
It’s a PvX game, not PvE or PvP-exclusive: Complaining about PvP in a PvX game is pointless.
Griefing is not an issue, just player behavior: The game should not limit freedom just because some people abuse mechanics.
Smaller guilds should form alliances: The game is designed to encourage social play.
🔹 Counterpoints:
This ignores the problem of exploit abuse.
Forcing alliances is not a solution—some players prefer independent small guilds.
---
Exploits and System Fixes Needed
#### Most Commonly Reported Issues (21 Users)
War dodging: Large guilds log off or manipulate war declarations to avoid fights.
Mayorship abuse: Players are dropping citizenship to manipulate elections.
Guard AI is useless: NPC guards do nothing to prevent griefing during node wars.
Caravan and world boss abuse: Mechanics are being exploited to disrupt fights unfairly.
🔹 Suggested Fixes:
Cooldowns on war declarations to prevent instant PvP.
Better NPC guards to stop griefing.
Election system improvements to prevent abuse.
🔹 Counterpoints (3 Users Disagreeing):
Fixing too many of these issues may remove meaningful PvP.
Guild wars should stay unrestricted to maintain a dynamic world.
---
Balance for Smaller Guilds
#### Smaller Guilds Need More Support (14 Users)
The game is currently unbalanced in favor of large guilds.
Small guilds have no way to protect themselves outside of diplomacy.
Many small guilds are quitting, reducing server diversity.
🔹 Proposed Fixes:
Adjust PvP systems so large guilds don’t dominate everything.
Introduce mechanics that help smaller groups compete.
---
#### Arguments That Small Guilds Should Adapt (9 Users)
The game is designed around alliances—small guilds need to find protection.
Survival requires adaptation, not artificial balancing.
There are already ways to deal with bigger guilds through cooperation.
🔹 Counterpoints:
Not everyone wants to be forced into alliances just to survive.
---
Intrepid’s Role in Fixing Issues
#### Arguments for More Developer Intervention (16 Users)
Exploits need to be patched ASAP rather than relying on community policing.
Toxic behavior should be discouraged through game mechanics.
Systems should be adjusted to ensure fairer fights.
🔹 Suggested Fixes:
War cooldowns and better anti-griefing mechanics.
Balancing election mechanics to prevent abuse.
More active developer feedback collection.
---
#### Arguments for Community Self-Policing (10 Users)
The player base should handle these issues themselves rather than relying on the devs.
Diplomacy and social contracts are part of the game’s intended experience.
Restricting mechanics makes the game less dynamic.
🔹 Counterpoints:
Self-policing does not work when exploit abuse is widespread.
Devs need to actively balance the game to prevent population drop-off.
---
Final Summary
13 users want multiple servers.
12 users want a mega server.
9 users want a full wipe (but are split on server type after).
18 users believe PvP toxicity is a major problem.
21 users say war dodging, mayorship abuse, and PvP mechanics need fixes.
14 users think small guilds need more support.
16 users think Intrepid should step in more.
4
Comments
Server Wipe Poll from the server
Data on Player Activity (Many didn't respond too so I assume the rest are waiting till p3 as we have 150 Guild members)
Def helps! Thanks for the post!
(there are alot of suggestions from alot of GM of actual solutions, not listed but for a over view this is pretty fair)
If they open up fresh starts the old servers will more than likely be ghost towns
Thats quite a stretch. This is a community run situation, and many small guilds pop up and dissappear quite often so it has nothing to do with if they have "worthy" feedback. It's posted here so you can also submit feedback too.
With a 50 member minimum
Yeah, its not anything to "exclude" anyone. how many guilds have we already seen fall apart? even some very large ones too? its more or less to ensure we can focus on certain things. And as you can see from these notes. alot of the conversation was being sure we could augment smaller guilds as well. so nobody is being forgotten by any means.
Agree with this, would prefer if spawn locations are randomized to add to the "exploration" element of the game and make botting more difficult.
I am not so certain about this. I kind of like the idea that wars are declared for other in-game economy/dispute reasons. For example, declaring a guild war to compete for a boss kill/grind spot, shut down gatherers/processors/crafters for a certain time, etc.
That being said, I don't really like the idea of how wars cause a bunch of people to just log off and do something else. Not sure if there is a good solution to this, but if the best answer to a problem in-game is "log off and wait" for enough players then it probably isnt good for the health of the game. Essentially, there should be some more options for gameplay other than spawn with broken gear at emberspring on repeat.
The main problem with wars and this PVP system is that once a team has established that it is much stronger and capable of destroying the other team, there isnt much else to do but wait until its over. Not exactly sure how the "surrender" option works, I think most of my guild just dropped guild to avoid the guild war. Should be something like a vote started by any players online rather than requiring guild leaders online to surrender. Maybe its already like that, I didnt really see how to surrender.
Of course, we wouldnt want guilds to just auto surrender for ever guild war and lose all incentive to start a guild war. Maybe some kind of punishment, like all guild members gear gets damaged or something. Shrug.
If they can't handle the risk of their war dec being surrendered, they shouldn't be war dec'ing.
I think they should have war rewards, and a debuff for losing of a similar tier guild
What would your suggestions be?
I agree.
Let Intrepid continue to develop the game, and do a server wipe when (and only when) there is a development based reason to do so.
Guilds may not be having fun in the test right now - but they aren't supposed to be there for fun. Those people that are there trying to have fun rather than being there trying to test are making the test harder for those actually trying to test - in other words they are actively making the game worse when it hits live.
As for things like guild wars and node wars, wait until the systems are fully (or at least near fully) implemented.
Presumptuous, some of the biggest a-holes you'll ever meet are are grown-ass adults.... just stick with shithead behavior not allowed.