Race Representation in a Node's Architecture

Like in any other MMO, some races will be more popular than others. In AoC this will have great repercussions because the number of players of a certain race that are active in a node's zone of influence, will determine that node's architectural style. There are also talks from Intrepid that a node of a certain race will give some kind of benefits to players of that same race. Regardless, the issue remains that certain races will be underrepresented and maybe even completely nonexistent. We might never see a Metropolis of some races.

A solution I would like to suggest to this issue would be to give races a bonus to their representation in a node’s architectural style decision based on the region/biome the node is in.

We know that each race has its starting zone and there are certain biomes that “belong” to certain races. So for example let’s say that we have 40 Dunir dwarves working on a node in their foothills in the northwest and 50 Ren’kai orcs are also working on that node, but the Dunir dwarves get a 50% bonus to their racial representation in that region because those foothills “belong” to their race. The 40 Dunir dwarves would now count as 60 Dunir dwarves and they would win the architectural representation over the 50 Ren’kai orcs.

The numbers would obviously need to be tested.

What are your thoughts on this topic or the proposed solution above?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

bloodprophet

I get that point. However there are several points here.
Nodes will take hundreds of players to build the idea that one player will make all the difference I think is a bit hubristic.
If you want to support a node but don't want to roll that race I also get and the answer is obvious as well. But as I said I understand the idea of not wanting to roll Orc but living in their city contributing to the aestic of the Orcs. However if other people are trying to swap it from orc to elf and you roll in as an elf contributing to orc. They are now being short changed by you as they are expecting you to be contributing to elf. I am not an RP player or completionist. I like playing and having fun chasing an obscure quest or title makes little sense to me but to each their own.
Next point if they allow everyone to select what ever aesthetic they want to contribute to then many people will do so. This could lead to a disjointed feeling for the RP crowd. Imagine walking into a city where 75% of the players are Orc and the aestic is Dwarven. Because a bunch of people picked that. (A large guild could do it just for the lol's).
I don't see the point in Intrepid spending time and money to ad this just so 3% can maybe MAYBE get a random quest.
I will look later but I don't remember them saying racial quests were tied behind node level. But if they did I agree that is a poor choice.

FallenPaladin

VmanGman wrote: »

A solution I would like to suggest to this issue would be to give races a bonus to their representation in a node’s architectural style decision based on the region/biome the node is in.

The effect each race (total number active per node) on how the node builds according to that race is in the gray area. I'm not sure if Intrepid has an algorithm chart on how to calculate exactly how a node grows "depending on how each race is represented," but, I do believe it is correlated. Of course, environment is a key factor on how a node grows, for instance, a desert node would have fountains of healing rather than portals (as an example), but those are race independent. Other factors come into play as well, including the mayor of the node, the champion(s) (he/she who slew the dragon), guilds, and of course, criminal (aka PvP and PvNPC) activity. So in short to answer your question, then, yes, it is a good feature, but, given all the other credentials it is but a small fish in a much larger pond.

CROW3

VmanGman wrote: »

due to how the currently proposed system works, the least popular race will most likely never see a metropolis with their race's architecture, quests, and content.

@VmanGman, let me play devil’s advocate, taking your concern above as the end state. And I’m asking this genuinely, not sarcastically…

So what?

Why is this a terrible thing? You’ve been following this game long enough to know that Steven’s not going to sabotage the game by making the content associated with a metro’s racial identity a statistically significant boon just to humans or elves (gods knows it won’t be dwarves). There may be some skins or completionist content, but nothing seriously big. Is your concern FOMO?

I’m curious.

bloodprophet

Let's go further down this rabbit hole.

If they gave the ability to change as you ask so players can better control the node architecture.
It might be well and good for a little bit.
If you and your friends decided to go one race over the others in an attempt to influence things. As soon as other people figured out what you were doing make no illusions the trolls will come out in force. The will do it just to watch people freak out that things didn't go the way they wanted.
Now what open a ticket and ask the company to change it? Quit? Become a forum and chat warrior railing against the injustice?
I think the best answer is leave it as originally stated and let the chips fall where they may.

Vhaeyne

I like the whole "It's a feature, not a bug" school of thought on this one.

If only 5% of the server is Niküa, then I would not expect to see any major Niküa architecture.

It makes no sense that a race that has 1/20th the world population would dominate 1/5th the world's metropolises by having a single metropolis. Assuming there are only five metropolises.

Daggial

I'm kinda worried about this too... worried that the entire world will have every node with human and elf architecture.

JustVine

bloodprophet wrote: »

If you want to support a node but don't want to roll that race I also get and the answer is obvious as well. But as I said I understand the idea of not wanting to roll Orc but living in their city contributing to the aestic of the Orcs. However if other people are trying to swap it from orc to elf and you roll in as an elf contributing to orc. They are now being short changed by you as they are expecting you to be contributing to elf.

I don't see how they are getting 'short changed' if it is freely available info on your character sheet.

Next point if they allow everyone to select what ever aesthetic they want to contribute to then many people will do so. This could lead to a disjointed feeling for the RP crowd. Imagine walking into a city where 75% of the players are Orc and the aestic is Dwarven. Because a bunch of people picked that. (A large guild could do it just for the lol's).

I think this is the most valid crit I have seen argued. I do disagree with it. But thanks for bringing up this point as it shows why the issue is so complex.

The reason I disagree with it is 'culture evolves'. Your guild example means that the guild itself decided that was how they decided to impose their cultural identity, which is sort of what the feature was intended to do in the first place.

However, I do consider the disjointed rp, and larger possibility of undermining the 'world feel' a fair consideration. This is why I proposed the citizen vote option. The default stays heavily 'as intended' but when it changes to something the community prefers it has a real historical meaning. Culture evolves. If people are worried about players cycling around it. Just make it cost exponentially more to do each time.

But that brings us back around to:

I will look later but I don't remember them saying racial quests were tied behind node level. But if they did I agree that is a poor choice.

If part of the base incentive of node wars is racial quest driven, its extremely bad design. Giving people the opportunity as a community to change their node architecture doesn't effect all the other much much MUCH more meaningful reasons to go to node war. Further more the racial quest incentive lowers over time as the majority of the population gets theirs leaving the minorities.

I just simply don't see this specific design principle worth sticking to in favor of ignoring compromise.

Dygz

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I like the whole "It's a feature, not a bug" school of thought on this one.

If only 5% of the server is Niküa, then I would not expect to see any major Niküa architecture.

It makes no sense that a race that has 1/20th the world population would dominate 1/5th the world's metropolises by having a single metropolis. Assuming there are only five metropolises.

But, this isn't just about one server. It's all servers.
Since an even spread of all races is 11%, it's likely that even the least popular race in the game will have a Metro at some point on some server.
Even 5% of the entire game population can be more than 11% on a single server.

Yuyukoyay

I do like the idea of a race getting a bonus in the areas they lore wise are more likely to prosper in. However, I'd rather the players get a greater choice over which races reside where they want. I don't think race is going to be a big identifier of an area overall. It's more likely to be represented by what crafters settle in the area than by what race is the mayor at the time.

I think it might be more cool if instead of representing one race. It mixes and matches the pallettes depending upon the % of all the races living in the area. So if you are 1 dwarf living in a elf village. You get that 1 random dwarf tree sitting in the middle of a lush forest actually adds more character to the area than anything you can generate on purpose with a formula.

VmanGman

Dygz wrote: »

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I like the whole "It's a feature, not a bug" school of thought on this one.

If only 5% of the server is Niküa, then I would not expect to see any major Niküa architecture.

It makes no sense that a race that has 1/20th the world population would dominate 1/5th the world's metropolises by having a single metropolis. Assuming there are only five metropolises.

But, this isn't just about one server. It's all servers.
Since an even spread of all races is 11%, it's likely that even the least popular race in the game will have a Metro at some point on some server.
Even 5% of the entire game population can be more than 11% on a single server.

Why do you keep talking about even spreads? The races are obviously not going to be evenly spread out. They never are. Some races will be significantly more popular than others.What's the point of discussing even spreads?
Also, what does the entire game's population have to do with a race's population on any single server? The least popular race will be the least popular on every single server.

bloodprophet

JustVine wrote: »

bloodprophet wrote: »

If you want to support a node but don't want to roll that race I also get and the answer is obvious as well. But as I said I understand the idea of not wanting to roll Orc but living in their city contributing to the aestic of the Orcs. However if other people are trying to swap it from orc to elf and you roll in as an elf contributing to orc. They are now being short changed by you as they are expecting you to be contributing to elf.

I don't see how they are getting 'short changed' if it is freely available info on your character sheet.

Next point if they allow everyone to select what ever aesthetic they want to contribute to then many people will do so. This could lead to a disjointed feeling for the RP crowd. Imagine walking into a city where 75% of the players are Orc and the aestic is Dwarven. Because a bunch of people picked that. (A large guild could do it just for the lol's).

I think this is the most valid crit I have seen argued. I do disagree with it. But thanks for bringing up this point as it shows why the issue is so complex.

The reason I disagree with it is 'culture evolves'. Your guild example means that the guild itself decided that was how they decided to impose their cultural identity, which is sort of what the feature was intended to do in the first place.

However, I do consider the disjointed rp, and larger possibility of undermining the 'world feel' a fair consideration. This is why I proposed the citizen vote option. The default stays heavily 'as intended' but when it changes to something the community prefers it has a real historical meaning. Culture evolves. If people are worried about players cycling around it. Just make it cost exponentially more to do each time.

But that brings us back around to:

I will look later but I don't remember them saying racial quests were tied behind node level. But if they did I agree that is a poor choice.

If part of the base incentive of node wars is racial quest driven, its extremely bad design. Giving people the opportunity as a community to change their node architecture doesn't effect all the other much much MUCH more meaningful reasons to go to node war. Further more the racial quest incentive lowers over time as the majority of the population gets theirs leaving the minorities.

I just simply don't see this specific design principle worth sticking to in favor of ignoring compromise.

Why would it be free information on everyones character sheet? Who has time to run around checking everyone's sheet? Why would anyone make it open knowledge?
Personally I will give the least amount of information I can to anyone I don't group with often enough for them to need that information. And I would expect the same from other's.

I fail to see any reason for comprise on any of the hard set systems they have proposed so far. I like the direction of everything except the family summons but that's a different thread.
On of the biggest draws for me is that not every server will be the same and not everything can be completed.
I personally am completely ok with the idea that some content will never be seen on individual servers. Racial metros included.

CROW3

I'm still not getting the 'so what?' of this thread... what's the real concern?

Vhaeyne

Dygz wrote: »

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I like the whole "It's a feature, not a bug" school of thought on this one.

If only 5% of the server is Niküa, then I would not expect to see any major Niküa architecture.

It makes no sense that a race that has 1/20th the world population would dominate 1/5th the world's metropolises by having a single metropolis. Assuming there are only five metropolises.

But, this isn't just about one server. It's all servers.
Since an even spread of all races is 11%, it's likely that even the least popular race in the game will have a Metro at some point on some server.
Even 5% of the entire game population can be more than 11% on a single server.

A feature, not a bug.

If players really wanted to see a node for an unpopular race. They could all band together to make that happen.

A bunch of Niküa players organizing a node take over to have a place to call their own on some server.

This is that "emergent gameplay" that makes social sandboxes so good.

Dygz

VmanGman wrote: »

Why do you keep talking about even spreads? The races are obviously not going to be evenly spread out. They never are. Some races will be significantly more popular than others.What's the point of discussing even spreads?
Also, what does the entire game's population have to do with a race's population on any single server? The least popular race will be the least popular on every single server.

Because that gives us an idea of the likely population spreads.
Especially compared to WoW, where the highest race is 15%.

The OP states: "We might never see a Metropolis of some races."
That is not just a single server. That is across all servers.
Some races never getting a Metro on a single server is a feature; not a bug.

VmanGman

Dygz wrote: »

VmanGman wrote: »

Why do you keep talking about even spreads? The races are obviously not going to be evenly spread out. They never are. Some races will be significantly more popular than others.What's the point of discussing even spreads?
Also, what does the entire game's population have to do with a race's population on any single server? The least popular race will be the least popular on every single server.

Because that gives us an idea of the likely population spreads.
Especially compared to WoW, where the highest race is 15%.

The OP states: "We might never see a Metropolis of some races."
That is not just a single server. That is across all servers.
Some races never getting a Metro on a single server is a feature; not a bug.

How is an even spread a likely population spread? You're making me think that you've never played a MMO before. Race populations are never spread out evenly and therefore it makes no sense for you to keep talking about even spreads. The most popular race in WoW is 16% percent and the least popular race is 3%... what does that have to do with even spreads.

Yes, if all servers have the same race population imbalance (which is to be expected), then that means that the least popular race will be the least popular across all servers with a very similar percentage. This means that the least popular race will have just as hard of a time getting a metro on any and every server... this would mean that we will never see a metro of the least popular race across any server. Once again, the race population percentages stay mostly the same across all servers. A race that isn't popular, keeps this lack of popularity across all servers. It's not about a single server... that's not how race populations work.

Dygz

I didn't say that an even spread is the likely spread.
Supplying what the even spread gives us an idea of what the likely ranges will be - as opposed to just posting a hypothetical 3% as the lowest population.
3% is unlikely to be the lowest population. 25% is unlikely to be the highest population.
Most likely the range will be somewhere between 5% and 20%. And 5% on one server will probably be enough to have a Village. It's not enough to have a Metro, but that is OK.

The most popular race in WoW might be 16% and the lowest 3%, but that is out of 22 races.
An even spread on WoW would be 4%.
I posted the range from 2019 of the top 10 races in WoW, which is 15% - 4%, which means in Ashes we can expect the largest range might be 20% - 5%. But most likely even the lowest population on one server will be greater than 5%. Almost certainly the lowest pop game-wide will be greater than 5%.

It is highly unlikely that all servers will have the same race population imbalance.
So, no, it does not mean that the least popular race will just have a hard time getting a metro on any server.
It depends on what the actual spread is. Partially depends on guild demographics, and streamer guilds and mega-guilds and which servers they choose.
Could be that the lowest pop in the game forms a large enough alliance to move to a server where they can take over a Metro.

Using WoW's lowest population as an example is a very poor comparison.
And, no, assuming that the lowest game-wide race pop is the lowest race on every server is poor logic.
Especially when there is incentive to try to build a Metro.

VmanGman

@Dygz : "Because that gives us an idea of the likely population spreads." referring to his example of 11% even population spread across the 9 races. Also @Dygz : "I didn't say that an even spread is the likely spread." /facepalm

You clearly don't understand how percentages work... the point is that the difference between the most popular race and the least popular race can be even as high as (if not higher) 5 times... 16% is 5 times greater than 3%. Yes, the least popular race in AoC could be 5%, but if the most popular race is 5 times more popular that brings us to 25%... that's how percentages work. If the least popular race is %5 and the most popular race is 25%, then the least popular race will have a very hard time getting higher level nodes to be inspired by their race. Even if the difference is only 3 times higher, the least popular race would still have a really hard time getting higher level nodes to be inspired by their race.

"But most likely even the lowest population on one server will be greater than 5%. Almost certainly the lowest pop game-wide will be greater than 5%". These are random and complete guesses that you just made up... so they can be disregarded. The fact is that we have seen instances where the most popular race is 5 times more popular than the least popular race. The difference between races is the number that we really care about because that's what decides a node's racial representation. We don't actually care what the lowest number is and what the greatest number is... we just care about the difference.

"It is highly unlikely that all servers will have the same race population imbalance"... "assuming that the lowest game-wide race pop is the lowest race on every server is poor logic." This is statistically false. It is actually much more likely that all servers will have very similar racial splits. There is no reason to believe that some servers will randomly have more Nikua than other servers (percentage-wise). There might be slight outliers, but statistically speaking it is much more likely that all servers will have similar racial splits.

Dygz

Let's assume the lowest population game-wide is Nikua at 5%.
Nikua at 5% on just one server is too low for a Metro, which is fine.
But, that 5% game-wide can band together to be 20% or even 25% on a different server.
And, if they want to have a Metro, there is incentive for them to do just that.

How players will choose to group in order to get a Metro will not be determined by statistics.
Having more Nikua (or whatever the lowest population is game-wide) band together on one sever will not be random. It will be strategic.

VmanGman

Dygz wrote: »

Let's assume the lowest population game-wide is Nikua at 5%.
Nikua at 5% on just one server is too low for a Metro, which is fine.
But, that 5% game-wide can band together to be 20% or even 25% on a different server.
And, if they want to have a Metro, there is incentive for them to do just that.

How players will choose to group in order to get a Metro will not be determined by statistics.
Having more Nikua (or whatever the lowest population is game-wide) band together on one sever will not be random. It will be strategic.

Hahaha your solution to the system is for people to reroll on a new server so that they can beat the odds?? Your solution is literally for people to quit their character and progress just to address an issue that could be solved with slightly better game design. This is insane... This is some next level logic. I can't continue trying to have a reasonable conversation with you because you're clearly not trying to be reasonable.

CROW3

The level of concern on this topic seems unreasonable to me, so I'll ask a 3rd time - what's the big deal?

Child Item