Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about Phase II and Phase III 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 testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about Phase II and Phase III 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.
Node Level Confusion.
Vhaeyne
Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
I re-watched both episodes of the Four-Part Node Series from eight years ago yesterday:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMvubbX-SHg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44HChA1Kkfk
I did this because, in a recent stream, one of the devs mentioned that Jundark is intended to be a level 50 zone, and that mobs there are currently scaled down for testing purposes.
This raised a major red flag for me. My understanding of the node system was that mobs would scale with the node’s level—not that zones would be permanently locked to specific level ranges.
Introducing static high-level and low-level zones feels like a complete derailment of the game’s core philosophy: that players shape the world. A static level 50 zone doesn’t align with that vision.
I get it—it’s been eight years. Maybe Intrepid has changed its definition of what a node is. But to me, all nodes should begin as level 1–10 areas, and increase by 10-level increments per node stage, up to level 50. That’s what always made sense to me.
If they’re moving toward static level zones, I don’t like it. Mid- and low-level nodes would never be able to compete with endgame zones in terms of relevance or player engagement.
Am I wrong? Did the dev misspeak?
What’s actually real here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMvubbX-SHghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44HChA1KkfkI did this because, in a recent stream, one of the devs mentioned that Jundark is intended to be a level 50 zone, and that mobs there are currently scaled down for testing purposes.
This raised a major red flag for me. My understanding of the node system was that mobs would scale with the node’s level—not that zones would be permanently locked to specific level ranges.
Introducing static high-level and low-level zones feels like a complete derailment of the game’s core philosophy: that players shape the world. A static level 50 zone doesn’t align with that vision.
I get it—it’s been eight years. Maybe Intrepid has changed its definition of what a node is. But to me, all nodes should begin as level 1–10 areas, and increase by 10-level increments per node stage, up to level 50. That’s what always made sense to me.
If they’re moving toward static level zones, I don’t like it. Mid- and low-level nodes would never be able to compete with endgame zones in terms of relevance or player engagement.
Am I wrong? Did the dev misspeak?
What’s actually real here?
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
4
Comments
If we only have one Divine Gateway at the moment and they're testing progression paths, it would make sense. Our lack of other Gateways wouldn't represent the final ideal either, so it wouldn't be weird to build a progression 'from Gateway Outward' during this time.
I agree! This probably is just going to be a high level zone for testing. I would assume once they get the dynamic mob spawns online it will change what level everything is.
But here is a question…. Is the whole world going to be low level mobs till you level the nodes up? This seems like a pain too if you level in one area and then want to travel to a more secluded node then need to level all that zone up as well.
I'm honestly sick of dealing with assumptions.
In this case, it's a big deal because, at best, they're temporarily developing the game in a direction that makes me less interested in the project—and at worst, they're permanently destroying the appeal of the node system.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
valid concern!
i want a dev that can answer that question to do it pls.
Some naval/pirate based guilds might want a large city by the sea
Some pve players might want a want a specific dungeon or raid boss unlocked
Some pvp players might want a military node to be a level 6, especially if it is in a region near a castle.
There is enough personal desires already to have node conflicts. We don't need it forced upon us by limiting where people are allowed to make their home
Is this another one of Steven's constant need to put conflict into everything? Is this driving the notion that the starting area nodes in the Riverlands must be sacked first before Jundark can even be built?
As Op pointed out, the Jundark nodes will never be able to compete with the rest of the world. Because of the Vasseling system, a lot of nodes will have to crumble before you ever see a level 5 or 6 node in the Jundark. Again, that's unnatural forced conflict and not organic player-driven conflict.
I'm tired of the constant drive to make everything have conflict when conflict will happen regardless based upon the needs and desires of the players on the server. We don't need forced conflict in every designed system.
Yeah…
I have noticed an uptick in developer responses on the forums. Maybe things aren’t as in vain as they used to be.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
Thank you for the bump. I am hopeful we get some detailed clarification on this soon. Maybe today in the Q&A for the live stream?
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.