Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Protecting Our Casuals: Gear

191012141521

Comments

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    And the constant scaling up of numbers isn't boring?
    Not if it is done well, no. And I always assume things will be done well, rather than done poorly.

    If a games gear scaling is done well, it means that top end players will want to respec every few gear upgrades, as the change in the balance of stats on their gear makes different builds better at a different rate.

    It is actually one of the more interesting and dynamic aspects of a game, but only if it is done well.
    You say this other way cuts off the head of top end players but your way trivializes their progress by handing it out. To me, that makes it meaningless since the rewards will be given out for free.
    I'm fairly sure I didn't say any of this.

    I said give players at the lower end a boost, not hand them raid tier loot.

    What I am suggesting here is literally what every MMO does. WoW basically resets gear with every expansion (not my preference), and Archeage always adds a new tier of each to get gear (or makes an existing tier easier to get) when it adds a new tier at the top.

    The issue with basically everything you are saying is that it isn't accounting at all for post launch content. In order for your system to work, the game would need to be perpetually stagnant. This is because most players will progress up to a point where it just gets too hard, and will then simply stop progressing. If that next stage of progression never gets easier, they never progress further.

    So these casual players NEED that boost - whether it is making an existing armor tier easier to get, or adding in a new tier that is better than what they have, yet still within their means to acquire.

    Your proposal would mean all casual players are literally at a stand still. Forever. And since there is a desire to not have too great a gap, it would also then mean that all top end players are at that same standstill.

    What the hell kind of MMO is that?

    There is a reason no one does this.
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited March 8
    Noaani wrote: »
    And the constant scaling up of numbers isn't boring?
    Not if it is done well, no. And I always assume things will be done well, rather than done poorly.

    If a games gear scaling is done well, it means that top end players will want to respec every few gear upgrades, as the change in the balance of stats on their gear makes different builds better at a different rate.

    It is actually one of the more interesting and dynamic aspects of a game, but only if it is done well.
    You say this other way cuts off the head of top end players but your way trivializes their progress by handing it out. To me, that makes it meaningless since the rewards will be given out for free.
    I'm fairly sure I didn't say any of this.

    I said give players at the lower end a boost, not hand them raid tier loot.

    What I am suggesting here is literally what every MMO does. WoW basically resets gear with every expansion (not my preference), and Archeage always adds a new tier of each to get gear (or makes an existing tier easier to get) when it adds a new tier at the top.

    The issue with basically everything you are saying is that it isn't accounting at all for post launch content. In order for your system to work, the game would need to be perpetually stagnant. This is because most players will progress up to a point where it just gets too hard, and will then simply stop progressing. If that next stage of progression never gets easier, they never progress further.

    So these casual players NEED that boost - whether it is making an existing armor tier easier to get, or adding in a new tier that is better than what they have, yet still within their means to acquire.

    Your proposal would mean all casual players are literally at a stand still. Forever. And since there is a desire to not have too great a gap, it would also then mean that all top end players are at that same standstill.

    What the hell kind of MMO is that?

    There is a reason no one does this.

    Stats are customizable because of crafting so increasing gear score isn't going to force you to take new stats and adjust your build.

    You can provide new stat options in a horizontal environment.

    If you are giving low end players boosts than you will eventually be giving them raid quality gear of a previous tier. To me, that trivializes the efforts of people who did that raid tier.

    Yes, almost every MMO does what you said, GW2 is the only one i know that doesn't. Eve and Albion don't either to my knowledge. Farming the same set of gear i did before with higher numbers has never gotten me excited for an expansion or patch. I'm always interested in the updates to classes, new gear appearances, and systems.

    You are lying to yourself if you think gear buffs help casuals progress. Yes, their item level went up but they are still in the same relative position and it doesn't change the content they would be doing. Giving them free gear doesn't turn them into raiders or further progresses them into the game, it's just a bunch of skinner box bullshit.

    Ashes is already not a stagnant game because of how the nodes work. Content will change. Things will become unavailable as new options open up.

    On top of that, any form of horizontal progression is something a casual can do. They can try new builds, level new classes, and work through other progression paths. Unlike a new raid tier that they can't progress in, these other forms of progression are things they can also benefit from.

    If you look at popular games you are thinking of, you also see that the updates you see provide a lot more to the game than higher level gear. We both know that only updating the item level would not keep people playing. It's only used as an incentive to play, an incentive that could be replaced. We know it can be replaced because we know that there are other reasons people play these games besides increasing their item level.
    smallerLizard.jpg
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Stats are customizable because of crafting so increasing gear score isn't going to force you to take new stats and adjust your build.
    I was wondering how long it would take you to get here - I was sort of trying to nudge you towards this for a few posts.

    Since stats on most gear can be influenced via crafting, that means there is no real horizontal progression to be obtained via doing different content in order to get different gear. This means that physical ring of yours simply doesn't exist - or at the very least isn't worth trying to get, as those stats can be had anyway.

    The only way that ring is worth it is if it has MORE stats than can be achieved with the crafting system - making it an upgrade anyway.

    And yes, of course the updates add more than just top level gear - I never said they didn't. The fact that there is other content in them is immaterial to this discussion - they add new top end gear, and make it easier for lower end players to get better gear than what they have.

    If your last sentence were true, then surely you would be fine with the game just not having gear at all. Therefore, your argument here is for Ashes to not have any gear, and I strongly disagree.
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Noaani wrote: »
    Stats are customizable because of crafting so increasing gear score isn't going to force you to take new stats and adjust your build.
    I was wondering how long it would take you to get here - I was sort of trying to nudge you towards this for a few posts.

    Since stats on most gear can be influenced via crafting, that means there is no real horizontal progression to be obtained via doing different content in order to get different gear. This means that physical ring of yours simply doesn't exist - or at the very least isn't worth trying to get, as those stats can be had anyway.

    The only way that ring is worth it is if it has MORE stats than can be achieved with the crafting system - making it an upgrade anyway.

    And yes, of course the updates add more than just top level gear - I never said they didn't. The fact that there is other content in them is immaterial to this discussion - they add new top end gear, and make it easier for lower end players to get better gear than what they have.

    If your last sentence were true, then surely you would be fine with the game just not having gear at all. Therefore, your argument here is for Ashes to not have any gear, and I strongly disagree.

    Yep, i probably should have said that gear doesn't need to be improved for your change to happen or talk about other ways to incentivize it but lets go down this rabbit hole.

    Stats aren't the only way you create horizontal progression though. On items, you have passive, set, and active abilities that can be applied. For our character, we also have augments. All of these can be used to incentivize player's to create new builds, in the same way your preferred scaling system would.

    When it comes to Ashes, we also know the crafting system is not as free as you are implying. We know you can adjust stats as a crafter but you don't have full freedom. There will be some limitations which give you a reason to craft different items, or at least an incentive to do different content for desired stats/effects.

    The ring would be worth it because it has something unique about it. Maybe it has a unique passive or stat thresholds that are ideal for certain builds. Maybe you need to break down the ring to get it's benefits on other items.

    If you really want me to go deeper in this then we can.

    The point of my updates add more comment was to point out what people are playing and how gear is just being used as an incentive to play it.

    For the last sentence, i think you misunderstand my point. I like gear but dislike the constant moving goal post of item level that is used as a carrot to keep people playing. I would prefer they use other tactics to incentivize play. I'm happy to farm more gear, i just want to do it for a reason besides the game making my gear obsolete. With the number of reasons people play these games and the amount of ideas out here, i think there are plenty of ways they can mix and match incentives to keep things interesting.

    What would you have happen to node content as the game progresses?
    smallerLizard.jpg
  • CawwCaww Member
    Casual-on-Casual PVP will be 99% (made-up figure) of all server PvP. The few "mighty" PvP player slayers won't be the world-wide menace this post envisions. There will be the occasional jerk but isn't there always?
  • tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Casual vs Casual PvP may start high (but not that high) and will decline over time. The first few days most people will try it out, but once we get some significant progress which we don't want to lose, Casuals will avoid unnecessary PvP.

    The serious PvPers then will be the majority of fighting, mostly against each other and the Casuals who step into voluntary fighting zones such as sieges and caravans.

    I think.
  • VaknarVaknar Moderator, Member, Staff
    I think there are a lot of ways for casual players to have fun / keep up with those who have time to dedicate! Funny enough, I have a dev discussion planned on this topic in the future where you can share your thoughts with the developers on a similar topic, so stay tuned for that! ;)

    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    community_management.gif
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Stats aren't the only way you create horizontal progression though. On items, you have passive, set, and active abilities that can be applied. For our character, we also have augments.

    This is.all true.

    The thing I think you are missing is that the same concept as with gear applies here.

    If that augment isn't of use on some piece of content, why does it exist? If it is of use on some piece of content, you will need it or be left behind - thus segregation.

    This same concept applies to literally anything - which is the point I have been trying to fet across.
    I'm happy to farm more gear, i just want to do it for a reason besides the game making my gear obsolete.
    This isn't really possible.

    As I said above, there is a limit to how many times you can "progress" horizontally, especially if you wish to minimize cheesy mechanics (things like needing a specific item to take on a mob - that is fine once every few years, but literally no more than that).

    In order to add new gear that you want to spend the time farming, it should be obvious that you need to see a reason to farm said gear. If you see no advantage in getting it, why would you spend time getting it?

    The more time it takes you and your guild to get it, the bigger that advantage needs to be.

    If it is worth you spending time to get it, it must be better than what you have. If it is better than what you have, it is making what you have obsolete - and if this round of new gear isn't, the next one absolutely will.

    MMO's are literally just a gear grinding time sink. Take away that gear to strive for, to aspire towards, and most people will just play something else.

    In short, your stated desire here is mathematical impossible.
    What would you have happen to node content as the game progresses?
    I'm just glad it isn't my job to work this out.

    The most likely thing is the addition of new religions and social organizations, as these shape each node a fair amount.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    edited March 9
    We did say that. 🧐
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • RamirezRamirez Member
    A casual never Will beat a player that player several hours anyway, even in skills or vertical progression
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)

    Hm, so are you saying that a casual player will not win 1v1s, but a group of casual players might be able to win an 8v8 vs a group of 'time-advantaged' players?

    I'm seriously asking because I know of design methods that would lead to this possibility, but have seen no signs of them in Ashes.

    If you just meant 'casual players can beat more hardcore players by outnumbering them', then feel free to ignore this one.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    edited March 9
    Azherae wrote: »
    Hm, so are you saying that a casual player will not win 1v1s, but a group of casual players might be able to win an 8v8 vs a group of 'time-advantaged' players?

    I don’t think so. In fact I think you would see the opposite effect, with TTK decreasing relative to 1v1.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Azherae wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)

    Hm, so are you saying that a casual player will not win 1v1s, but a group of casual players might be able to win an 8v8 vs a group of 'time-advantaged' players?
    I'm not sure how you could take "strength in numbers and teamwork" and end up with this, to be honest.

    Clearly, the comment was "if you want a chance to beat someone with better gear than you, outnumber them".
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    @Noaani

    The problem with constantly increasing the item power with new patches and expansions is that eventually players become disillusioned when they realized that ultimately their progress is meaningless since it will be wiped next patch/expansion. It will work for a while when the game is new, but eventually it won’t feel so good to work for the next tier when you know that it will become obsolete soon after. I guess this can be balanced through the frequency of higher power tiers being added, but still the issues of disillusionment is there.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    LMFAO
    We already covered that like half-11-dozen times.
    On Page 1 !!!
  • Happymeal2415Happymeal2415 Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited March 9
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?

    Then the casuals lose.
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited March 9
    Dygz wrote: »
    LMFAO
    We already covered that like half-11-dozen times.
    On Page 1 !!!

    It was never an answer that resulted in casuals being able to stand up and fight on their own. You literally suggested that Caww was right and that casuals will just have to accept defeat and take a beating. If you think that what I’m saying is hilarious, imagine suggesting that sitting there to take a beating because you can’t win is acceptable game design. Hahahaha.

    Also, Vaknar suggested strength in numbers as if the more dedicated players don’t also have access to strength in numbers.

    Edit: word
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?

    Then the casuals lose.

    I’m sure that those players will stick around the game for long and that AoC will be successful then.
  • Happymeal2415Happymeal2415 Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    VmanGman wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?

    Then the casuals lose.

    I’m sure that those players will stick around the game for long and that AoC will be successful then.

    I dont understand what you want from the game then. You seem to be dead set on having every scenario end in casuals winning.

    Apparently whoever plays the least and plays solo should get the best gear or no one will play this game
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    VmanGman wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?

    Then the casuals lose.

    I’m sure that those players will stick around the game for long and that AoC will be successful then.

    I dont understand what you want from the game then. You seem to be dead set on having every scenario end in casuals winning.

    Apparently whoever plays the least and plays solo should get the best gear or no one will play this game

    I never said any of those things.
  • Happymeal2415Happymeal2415 Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    VmanGman wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?

    Then the casuals lose.

    I’m sure that those players will stick around the game for long and that AoC will be successful then.

    I dont understand what you want from the game then. You seem to be dead set on having every scenario end in casuals winning.

    Apparently whoever plays the least and plays solo should get the best gear or no one will play this game

    I never said any of those things.

    K then explain
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    VmanGman wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Vaknar wrote: »
    As for PvP, while a casual player might not always win a 1v1 against a player who has more time to dedicate, there is always strength in numbers and teamwork :)
    Haha!
    I think we tried to say that on Page 1.

    @Dygz @CROW3 @Vaknar So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?

    Then the casuals lose.

    I’m sure that those players will stick around the game for long and that AoC will be successful then.

    I dont understand what you want from the game then. You seem to be dead set on having every scenario end in casuals winning.

    Apparently whoever plays the least and plays solo should get the best gear or no one will play this game

    I never said any of those things.

    K then explain

    I explained it in the OP as well as throughout the thread. I cannot be any more clear than I have already been.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Hm, so are you saying that a casual player will not win 1v1s, but a group of casual players might be able to win an 8v8 vs a group of 'time-advantaged' players?

    I don’t think so. In fact I think you would see the opposite effect, with TTK decreasing relative to 1v1.

    This is why I ask. With the game's current design, I would expect the best chance you could give a 'casual' against a 'more hardcore' would be in 1v1.

    But there are design changes that could be made so that it was reversed, and those changes would explicitly reduce the casual player's chances in a 1v1, but that might be the intention, as Intrepid has often indicated that they want higher 'group' and 'community' activity.

    If the answer was 'if you get jumped when solo, count it as a loss and don't bother fighting back, then gather your friends' (even if you could only get to even numbers) and your chances of winning went up because of the design, in a 4v4, then that would be in line with their design goals, but not what we've previously seen of Combat.

    However, they are definitely overhauling combat, so it could have been hinting at that.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    VmanGman wrote: »
    So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay?

    No, I think I give more credit to casual players. It's clear - based on the dozen pages of this thread - that you're exploring a gray area with a black-or-white perspective.
    Azherae wrote: »
    This is why I ask. With the game's current design, I would expect the best chance you could give a 'casual' against a 'more hardcore' would be in 1v1.

    In a force on force, symmetrical conflict - yeah, I agree. There are a lot of tactical variables that could change that equation though.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    CROW3 wrote: »
    VmanGman wrote: »
    So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay?

    No, I think I give more credit to casual players. It's clear - based on the dozen pages of this thread - that you're exploring a gray area with a black-or-white perspective.
    Azherae wrote: »
    This is why I ask. With the game's current design, I would expect the best chance you could give a 'casual' against a 'more hardcore' would be in 1v1.

    In a force on force, symmetrical conflict - yeah, I agree. There are a lot of tactical variables that could change that equation though.

    If the gear design leans into the game's other design elements, it would resolve it without any issues, too. This is 'solved' and 'easy', having been done in multiple PvE games before now, it's just not often applied to PvP games.

    @VmanGman in short, this just 'isn't how this works' with people who have design experience. I'll give an example and you can tell me what you think the problem with it would be.

    Sword A of Green Tier has 4 Enhancement slots. Sword B of Purple Tier has 8.

    The crafter can put Attack into all slots, but the more Attack in each slot, the harder it is to get the next one in. This is based on total number, not 'number relative to the weapon'.

    So it's equally easy to get an Attack +20 Green Tier sword as it is to get an Attack+20 Accuracy +20 Purple Tier sword, but it's really really hard to get an Attack +40 Purple Tier Sword.

    But 'casuals' don't have enough Evasion, let's say, for the Accuracy to be necessary. It's nice, but it helps more in PvE or against other 'hardcore' players. The Accuracy 'doesn't affect the fight much'.

    Now you have 'Green sword people' fighting 'Purple sword people' and the overall damage done is similar. This sort of design can't be described simply by things like 'gear power in tiers', so even attempting to paraphrase it, leads to concerns like yours.

    But if you ask someone 'how much stronger is Sword B than Sword A', in most games, the answer will be 35% stronger (assuming the semi-standard range of 200-600 accuracy and opposed stat calculations). It's 35% more effective than Sword A in fights against strong or equal enemies, but not when facing 'Casuals'. An Attack +40 Purple Tier Sword would be a 'casual slayer', but would involve a massive investment for a sword that might not hold up in 'even' PvP as well.

    tl;dr hardcore players already have time, tend to be number-crunchers, and collect tons of gear. Make them HAVE to do all that to be versatile without giving them as much advantage over 'casuals' unless they're specifically aiming to go out there and kill said casuals as a 'preferred enemy'.
    Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
    
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited March 9
    VmanGman wrote: »
    Noaani

    The problem with constantly increasing the item power with new patches and expansions is that eventually players become disillusioned when they realized that ultimately their progress is meaningless since it will be wiped next patch/expansion.

    This is only true if you follow WoW's method of doing this, where all said progress is basically wiped over night.

    If all progress isn't wiped, people aren't going to consider their progress meaningless. It is perfectly possible to add new top end content to a game without having to wipe the progress players have made up to that point. Most other games manage to do this.
    VmanGman wrote: »
    So casual players are relegated to babysitter gameplay? Or what happens when the more dedicated player also brings numbers and teamwork?
    The idea here, just as in all other open world PvP games, is to not pick a fight that you have no chance of winning.

    You seem to think that casuals and top end players will have no option but to fight - this is very untrue. As I have said many times, I am more incentivized to NOT fight most of the time, and the meager resources a casual player may have on them definitely won't tempt me.
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited March 9
    Noaani wrote: »
    Stats aren't the only way you create horizontal progression though. On items, you have passive, set, and active abilities that can be applied. For our character, we also have augments.

    This is.all true.

    The thing I think you are missing is that the same concept as with gear applies here.

    If that augment isn't of use on some piece of content, why does it exist? If it is of use on some piece of content, you will need it or be left behind - thus segregation.

    This same concept applies to literally anything - which is the point I have been trying to fet across.
    I'm happy to farm more gear, i just want to do it for a reason besides the game making my gear obsolete.
    This isn't really possible.

    As I said above, there is a limit to how many times you can "progress" horizontally, especially if you wish to minimize cheesy mechanics (things like needing a specific item to take on a mob - that is fine once every few years, but literally no more than that).

    In order to add new gear that you want to spend the time farming, it should be obvious that you need to see a reason to farm said gear. If you see no advantage in getting it, why would you spend time getting it?

    The more time it takes you and your guild to get it, the bigger that advantage needs to be.

    If it is worth you spending time to get it, it must be better than what you have. If it is better than what you have, it is making what you have obsolete - and if this round of new gear isn't, the next one absolutely will.

    MMO's are literally just a gear grinding time sink. Take away that gear to strive for, to aspire towards, and most people will just play something else.

    In short, your stated desire here is mathematical impossible.
    What would you have happen to node content as the game progresses?
    I'm just glad it isn't my job to work this out.

    The most likely thing is the addition of new religions and social organizations, as these shape each node a fair amount.

    I think i have the same response for your augment argument as i have for your gear one. Change the augment or the content. Generally, if there is something in a game that isn't being used, they will change it so it has a use.

    I'm not saying they should take away the gear grind, I'm talking about changing the incentives and making them more horizontal. I agree that the harder the content, the more time you spend doing something, the better the rewards should be. I'm against those rewards you earned from challenging content being outclassed by easier content in the future.

    One assumption i have made but not mentioned is that the best gear isn't going be easy for anyone to get since it's in the open world and only one group can claim it's resources each spawn. Combine that with the over-enchanting mechanic and there will always be a way to improve your gear.

    I also think there will be other forms of progression and projects that require materials from high end content.

    You also need to farm content for repair mats.

    I already talked about the build incentive so put all of those things together and i think there will be plenty of reasons to do content.

    I assume you say it's not mathematically possibly because you can't easily imagine all the variations necessary to keep it going but If all they did for an expansion was increase the item level of drops without any new content, the game would die. They need to come up with new content for each expansion.

    Do you think it's mathematically impossible to come up with a new content for every expansion? Maybe a better question for you is if you think it's impossible for them to come up with new bosses each expansion?
    smallerLizard.jpg
  • VmanGmanVmanGman Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    @Azherae where did you get the idea that it would be harder to continue adding attack to further slots or that slots even exist as you described them in the crafting system? I’ve just never seen this described by Intrepid so I’m curious.
Sign In or Register to comment.