Remove leveling up or make it harder and fun

1) Why do we have leveling up in MMOs?
2) Why Ashes of Creation needs the leveling up phase?

In single player RPGs leveling gives a sense of progression while presenting the story.
When the player reaches max level, the end of story might also be close.
The fun comes from seeing how the fight style changes when a new skill is added.

In MMORPGs knowing how to play against other classes makes us read and watch videos to learn them too.
And makes sense to go through the story only once, for the first character.
Maybe different races have different stories?
Anyway I like pressing the ESC key to skip everything. I don't care about story when I see players running around skipping content too.

On release the developers anticipate max level should be attainable in approximately 45 days if playing 4-6 hours per day.[14][15]

I think the 45 days leveling in AoC is very short. Some players will definitely reach max level in half that time.
So why do we have it in this game?

I think the life of the character at mid levels should be fun too.
But as it is now, the leveling up phase is a disadvantage for AoC.

How can this game, based on caravans, nodes wars and risk vs rewards be adjusted to let players see and enjoy these aspects while leveling up?
Why would anyone go through this 2nd and 3rd time?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Spif

To make all content non-trivial to anyone of any level, and allow PvP participation at any level, you can look at other game's models. I'm simplifying the system a bit, but here it goes:

* You level up to 50 and unlock skills and combat options as you go.
* Every player and every mob is combat leveled to 50 at all times. So there is nowhere in the game that you can go to kill low level mobs
* Combat leveling takes your gear level, as compared to you player level, into account. So a L30 in L30 gear is more powerful than a L30 in L20 gear.
* In PvP all players technically have the same level, same base stats and same gear stats (assuming gear level = player level), so you don't just insta-kill lowbies. But higher level players usually have a small advantage due to more skill options. Max level players have the skills advantage and also an optimized gear advantage, but it's still less than having that plus a level difference advantage.
* In PvE everyone is combat leveled to 50, so grouping anywhere or with anyone is possible
* Twinking (gearing out a lowbie) and gaming the combat leveling system can be an issue (IE, hatchet masters at L15), but that's addressable with tweaks to the combat leveling system
* Gear drops relative to your level. This can be an issue with shared gear drops, but could be worked around (gear level is set when claimed)

One thing you lose with this is the ability to lock out content for the player based on character level. Which doesn't seem like a problem with the node leveling system. You can lock out higher content by tying it to node level. Another disadvantage is that leveling up doesn't feel as good, as your gear ends up -1 level now and you actually lose a little bit of stats. But you get skill points and possibly new skills.

I honestly think this is a better system than having mobs combat levels be tied only to node level or geographic area, since that effectively makes every L2 node trivial for a L40 player. Node difficulty could be setup to be relative to max level. IE, L1 node has L45 mobs (on average). L2 node has L47 mobs, L3=49, L4= 50, L5=51, L6=52. In order to make certain areas of a node more/less difficult, there could be a level modifier for the area (ie, a goblin tribe lair) that goes on top of the node level.

neuroguy

Strevi wrote: »

The anticipation you mentioned is indeed a valid reason but is not enough.
The leveling for me would be fun if the path would contain stages which a high level character cannot experience. Then going from a stage to the next would be something new, and also a veteran player would want to start an alt again to go through those stages once more.

Discovering what other classes can do works only if I do not watch youtube videos.
Or in case of AoC, if I do not play the Alpha 2 and I stop watching the monthly updates.

That's fair. Keep in mind that the game is intentionally not going to be super alt-friendly. I don't recall exactly when Steven said this but for the sake of the artisan system and the limited specializations (and generally to avoid self sustaining/independent players) there is not meant to be very easy ways to level an alt. Systems like node citizenship also make it less advantageous to have alts, removing or attenuating some of reasons for having them. It is supposed to take considerable effort to have a second high level character. No comments on if that is a good or bad decision.

Grabba_the_Butt

I think you are going to see that the need to level fast to reach the end game asap will not be as big of a necessity in Ashes as in other MMOs. In a lot of PVP/survival MMOs the idea is that you need to max your levels asap in order to claim a town and get an edge in pvp, or in the case of all MMOs, to do a dungeon for the best gear. However, in Ashes most of the higher-end dungeons probably won't even unlock until nodes reach levels 4 or 5, with the highest not until 6. So even if a player reaches max before a node enters those higher numbers they won't really be able to progress farther than most players. Sure I guess you could level crafting in the meantime, but even crafting is limited by drops found in dungeons. So for months, I wouldn't expect many people to have gear greater than their leveling/crafting basic gear until the nodes unlock dungeons

Noaani

Strevi wrote: »

The leveling for me would be fun if the path would contain stages which a high level character cannot experience. Then going from a stage to the next would be something new, and also a veteran player would want to start an alt again to go through those stages once more.

Many games have this, delivered to players via quests.q

As to your question of why any player would go through the same leveling process a second time, I actually agree with you.

However, good games give many different paths for gaining levels. One game I played a while in particular had it so you could level up 80 characters to within 10 levels of the games level cap - without ever having to repeat any content. There were multiple full quest paths for solo players, a quiet path for those with a group of friends, multiple places in each level range to just grind out some levels if you preferred doing that solo, and even more places to just grind if you were in a group.

Since the game didnt have 8 character slots per account, the only way you would do the same leveling content twice is if you actually wanted to (many people loved the group quests, people would roll alta just to do them all again).

This is how a game does leveling properly.

dagirem

Feels to me that lot of you forgot that level of mobs and content rises only with zones. So even if there are hardcore players, they can't push so fast at the start of the game. I think the city stage will come early, but after that it will slow down.

I think leveling to max in 45 days will be only possible, if everything is already set and you won't need to wait for content to open. Otherwise, players that would get to max level after 15 days would rule the server. They would get hands on best mats, equip and could possibly lock you out of end game by monopolizing it.

Strevi

Noaani wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

The leveling for me would be fun if the path would contain stages which a high level character cannot experience. Then going from a stage to the next would be something new, and also a veteran player would want to start an alt again to go through those stages once more.

Many games have this, delivered to players via quests.q

As to your question of why any player would go through the same leveling process a second time, I actually agree with you.

However, good games give many different paths for gaining levels. One game I played a while in particular had it so you could level up 80 characters to within 10 levels of the games level cap - without ever having to repeat any content. There were multiple full quest paths for solo players, a quiet path for those with a group of friends, multiple places in each level range to just grind out some levels if you preferred doing that solo, and even more places to just grind if you were in a group.

Since the game didnt have 8 character slots per account, the only way you would do the same leveling content twice is if you actually wanted to (many people loved the group quests, people would roll alta just to do them all again).

This is how a game does leveling properly.

I don't have a clear image about how quests will work in AoC.
But on wiki, in the design pillars section, "engaging and immersive story" is on the first place.
I hope to be great at least once, during the first leveling up.

Spif

dagirem wrote: »

Feels to me that lot of you forgot that level of mobs and content rises only with zones. So even if there are hardcore players, they can't push so fast at the start of the game. I think the city stage will come early, but after that it will slow down.

I think leveling to max in 45 days will be only possible, if everything is already set and you won't need to wait for content to open. Otherwise, players that would get to max level after 15 days would rule the server. They would get hands on best mats, equip and could possibly lock you out of end game by monopolizing it.

I think this would cause a HUGE amount of player dissatisfaction among the sweaties and streamers. I mean, you're playing a game, leveling and even doing other things, but just playing so much that you're going faster than the node systems allows...and all mobs eventually become grey to you. You're unhappy, can't even craft because there's no mats available for where you're at, post a bad review of the game and wait.

Then one node finally gets to a higher level and gets absolutely SWARMED by players waiting for, lets say, the first level 4 node to appear. Now, you're unhappy for another reason, but at least you can level. Then it happens again waiting for a L5 node, and again waiting for a L6 node.

The best mats may have to wait for nodes to level up, but hopefully players can still push their own pace to L50 in "greens" if nothing else

Noaani

Strevi wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

The leveling for me would be fun if the path would contain stages which a high level character cannot experience. Then going from a stage to the next would be something new, and also a veteran player would want to start an alt again to go through those stages once more.

Many games have this, delivered to players via quests.q

As to your question of why any player would go through the same leveling process a second time, I actually agree with you.

However, good games give many different paths for gaining levels. One game I played a while in particular had it so you could level up 80 characters to within 10 levels of the games level cap - without ever having to repeat any content. There were multiple full quest paths for solo players, a quiet path for those with a group of friends, multiple places in each level range to just grind out some levels if you preferred doing that solo, and even more places to just grind if you were in a group.

Since the game didnt have 8 character slots per account, the only way you would do the same leveling content twice is if you actually wanted to (many people loved the group quests, people would roll alta just to do them all again).

This is how a game does leveling properly.

I don't have a clear image about how quests will work in AoC.
But on wiki, in the design pillars section, "engaging and immersive story" is on the first place.
I hope to be great at least once, during the first leveling up.

My take on this is that Intrepid have plans for the story to be player driven, rather than quest driven.

Rather than completing quests to read about some intricate story that Intrepid writers have crafted, Intrepid will be more about the actions of players making up the story of your server.

The "story" in Ashes will be immersive because you are a character in it, rather than someone reading it - for better or worse.

Strevi

Noaani wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

The leveling for me would be fun if the path would contain stages which a high level character cannot experience. Then going from a stage to the next would be something new, and also a veteran player would want to start an alt again to go through those stages once more.

Many games have this, delivered to players via quests.q

As to your question of why any player would go through the same leveling process a second time, I actually agree with you.

However, good games give many different paths for gaining levels. One game I played a while in particular had it so you could level up 80 characters to within 10 levels of the games level cap - without ever having to repeat any content. There were multiple full quest paths for solo players, a quiet path for those with a group of friends, multiple places in each level range to just grind out some levels if you preferred doing that solo, and even more places to just grind if you were in a group.

Since the game didnt have 8 character slots per account, the only way you would do the same leveling content twice is if you actually wanted to (many people loved the group quests, people would roll alta just to do them all again).

This is how a game does leveling properly.

I don't have a clear image about how quests will work in AoC.
But on wiki, in the design pillars section, "engaging and immersive story" is on the first place.
I hope to be great at least once, during the first leveling up.

My take on this is that Intrepid have plans for the story to be player driven, rather than quest driven.

Rather than completing quests to read about some intricate story that Intrepid writers have crafted, Intrepid will be more about the actions of players making up the story of your server.

The "story" in Ashes will be immersive because you are a character in it, rather than someone reading it - for better or worse.

The way I imagine this feels weird. Would be like living in a story generator where I am the story for Steven who watches from above

And he wants all these different servers to entertain himself with different stories.

But regarding leveling, I see a quote on wiki

We want the game to be a living game, which means that all content should be relevant at all times. I’d say that we try to make as little distinction between the leveling up experience and the end game experience as possible. The whole journey is important to us, in order to maximize the fun people have during different stages of the game.[15] – Sarah Flanagan

I can read this in more ways.
"should be relevant at all times" can mean: "even one year after server launch, what a lvl 25 player does is important for his community"

Azherae

Strevi wrote: »

I can read this in more ways.
"should be relevant at all times" can mean: "even one year after server launch, what a lvl 25 player does is important for his community"

That could be true.

Right now, I could be much more effective in my other 'game with nodes' if I had four or five 'additional newbies' at 'low level'.

My 'Node'/faction doesn't need any more high level people right now. And those low level pilots would definitely have a large and meaningful effect on 'my Node's ZoI' while they leveled up. Then they could be rewarded by the levels themselves, and anything 'I' chose to give them as extra.

We're currently more than a year in, and this won't really change either. I think it would be difficult to design Ashes in a way that would entirely make this useless.

It's not really that 'a high level player wouldn't be just as useful', it's that they wouldn't be much MORE useful, the task doesn't require them to be high level, so their time is better spent elsewhere.

Ludullu

I said in some old thread that L2's low lvl gatherers (and sometimes even other classes) were valuable because mobs on lower lvls would have better low tier mat drops than on higher lvls. And considering how crafting worked in L2, even after a year those same low lvls would be valuable. Maybe a bit less so, because new mobs appeared and gave another way to farm the same mats, but considering that most people usually just leveled up instead of trying to stay at the same stage of progress - the low lvls were still appreciated.

Now this was mainly supported by the inability of high lvl players to get any drops from lower lvled mobs. Iirc it was a 9 lvl limit. So high lvls physically couldn't just go and farm what they wanted and had to either trade with others or have a low lvl guildmate/alt.

So with that mechanic in mind, I'm curious how Intrepid will design the game that will supposedly allow players of all lvls to have equal "fun" and relevancy.

Nova_terra

NiKr wrote: »

I said in some old thread that L2's low lvl gatherers (and sometimes even other classes) were valuable because mobs on lower lvls would have better low tier mat drops than on higher lvls. And considering how crafting worked in L2, even after a year those same low lvls would be valuable. Maybe a bit less so, because new mobs appeared and gave another way to farm the same mats, but considering that most people usually just leveled up instead of trying to stay at the same stage of progress - the low lvls were still appreciated.

Now this was mainly supported by the inability of high lvl players to get any drops from lower lvled mobs. Iirc it was a 9 lvl limit. So high lvls physically couldn't just go and farm what they wanted and had to either trade with others or have a low lvl guildmate/alt.

So with that mechanic in mind, I'm curious how Intrepid will design the game that will supposedly allow players of all lvls to have equal "fun" and relevancy.

As long as it looks different than the L2 low level gatherer system I will probably be happy as I don't really like the idea that it's "in my best interest" to have one max level main, and then forever low level alts. Obviously I can just buy from the auction house or whatever if I don't want to do that (and I won't) but I just think that is bland design and I am hoping Intrepid has worked on a way to make this more interesting for all players of all levels.

Azherae

Nova_terra wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

I said in some old thread that L2's low lvl gatherers (and sometimes even other classes) were valuable because mobs on lower lvls would have better low tier mat drops than on higher lvls. And considering how crafting worked in L2, even after a year those same low lvls would be valuable. Maybe a bit less so, because new mobs appeared and gave another way to farm the same mats, but considering that most people usually just leveled up instead of trying to stay at the same stage of progress - the low lvls were still appreciated.

Now this was mainly supported by the inability of high lvl players to get any drops from lower lvled mobs. Iirc it was a 9 lvl limit. So high lvls physically couldn't just go and farm what they wanted and had to either trade with others or have a low lvl guildmate/alt.

So with that mechanic in mind, I'm curious how Intrepid will design the game that will supposedly allow players of all lvls to have equal "fun" and relevancy.

As long as it looks different than the L2 low level gatherer system I will probably be happy as I don't really like the idea that it's "in my best interest" to have one max level main, and then forever low level alts. Obviously I can just buy from the auction house or whatever if I don't want to do that (and I won't) but I just think that is bland design and I am hoping Intrepid has worked on a way to make this more interesting for all players of all levels.

Do people actually hate the 'option to fight the same mobs at many levels', in this context?

I hear it referred to as a negative, but mostly relative to blandness.

Like... you beat up a level 5 Toucan and get Bird Meat for cooking, when you're level 20 you don't get that anymore and have to go into the jungle to find Macaws IF you really don't want to use the Auction House for it. The 'main/better' level 20 content isn't Macaws, but you have the OPTION.

Extrapolate to Terrifying Toucan and Murderous Macaw which live on high level islands or something at level 44. Again, not 'the best spot to farm drops' and probably 'out of the way' but certainly 'enough that the Bird Meat Market doesn't collapse when there are no lowbies around'.

I'm not sure if the complaints I have seen are 'I don't believe that high level versions of low level mobs should ever exist in a game' or 'I don't want to grind Macaws for half the game'.

Nova_terra

Azherae wrote: »

Nova_terra wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

I said in some old thread that L2's low lvl gatherers (and sometimes even other classes) were valuable because mobs on lower lvls would have better low tier mat drops than on higher lvls. And considering how crafting worked in L2, even after a year those same low lvls would be valuable. Maybe a bit less so, because new mobs appeared and gave another way to farm the same mats, but considering that most people usually just leveled up instead of trying to stay at the same stage of progress - the low lvls were still appreciated.

Now this was mainly supported by the inability of high lvl players to get any drops from lower lvled mobs. Iirc it was a 9 lvl limit. So high lvls physically couldn't just go and farm what they wanted and had to either trade with others or have a low lvl guildmate/alt.

So with that mechanic in mind, I'm curious how Intrepid will design the game that will supposedly allow players of all lvls to have equal "fun" and relevancy.

As long as it looks different than the L2 low level gatherer system I will probably be happy as I don't really like the idea that it's "in my best interest" to have one max level main, and then forever low level alts. Obviously I can just buy from the auction house or whatever if I don't want to do that (and I won't) but I just think that is bland design and I am hoping Intrepid has worked on a way to make this more interesting for all players of all levels.

Do people actually hate the 'option to fight the same mobs at many levels', in this context?

I hear it referred to as a negative, but mostly relative to blandness.

Like... you beat up a level 5 Toucan and get Bird Meat for cooking, when you're level 20 you don't get that anymore and have to go into the jungle to find Macaws IF you really don't want to use the Auction House for it. The 'main/better' level 20 content isn't Macaws, but you have the OPTION.

Extrapolate to Terrifying Toucan and Murderous Macaw which live on high level islands or something at level 44. Again, not 'the best spot to farm drops' and probably 'out of the way' but certainly 'enough that the Bird Meat Market doesn't collapse when there are no lowbies around'.

I'm not sure if the complaints I have seen are 'I don't believe that high level versions of low level mobs should ever exist in a game' or 'I don't want to grind Macaws for half the game'.

My personal opinion is that I don't mind if I can get X or Y mat (bird meat in this example) from Terrifying Toucans instead of level 5 toucans even if it is at a mild inconvenience, or if the level 5 toucans will drop the same mats for me at max level. But as far as I am aware the way this is solved in current games is "everything other than the rarest variation of this mat is 0.0000001 cents and trash" or the you need the base mat "synthesized" to a rarer variation in which case you need bird meat to the nth degree in which case I am farming macaws for 75% of my gametime (most recent example is NW with iron).

Also in truth I am not much of a gatherer, in most games my friends are heavy crafters and I am more the mule/worker that feeds them materials so this is a type of topic that is low on my "Intrepid needs to get this right" list, but there are games that have made a crafter of me instead of me finding it not worth the effort.

Azherae wrote: »

Like... you beat up a level 5 Toucan and get Bird Meat for cooking, when you're level 20 you don't get that anymore and have to go into the jungle to find Macaws IF you really don't want to use the Auction House for it. The 'main/better' level 20 content isn't Macaws, but you have the OPTION.

This to me stands out as the least annoying way to implement this as if I decide to take up cooking and level it I at least have a way to find this content instead of bulk buy from the auction house or have mats fed to me.

Suffice to say, I am not an artisan/gathering main and my opinion in this subject is variable and unreliable at best but I am hopeful that Intrepid find a way for me to be excited about aspects of crafting and interact with it as someone who doesn't immediately jump at this content in most cases due to blandness and that doesn't require me to have 6 alts to "be a crafter".

Ludullu

Here's one of the best examples of low lvl "gathering" against just drops in L2. Left side is just dropping a t1 mat, that's used in a ton of recipes, and right side is L2's gathering that only one class can do.

As you can see, there's ways to farm the resource at pretty much all lvls, with the best mobs being at higher lvls, but it is waaaay better to just Spoil mobs at lower lvls because they bring in so much more of the resource.

This way even low lvl gatherers can make a ton of money, because the resource is required throughout all crafting tiers and top lvl players don't really get it in huge numbers while farming.

I really hope Intrepid can manage a system similar to this. It mainly works if high lvl players always have something valuable to do and get money from it, while low lvl players can concentrate on gathering and make a ton of money from it.

This is also the reason why I'd prefer for gatherer professions to have a similar setup, where high proficiency artisans have "better" things to do, so the low tier mats are left to the low proficiency players. Though this has other implications for the longevity of the game and potential design workarounds required for this type of system to work.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Here's one of the best examples of low lvl "gathering" against just drops in L2. Left side is just dropping a t1 mat, that's used in a ton of recipes, and right side is L2's gathering that only one class can do.

As you can see, there's ways to farm the resource at pretty much all lvls, with the best mobs being at higher lvls, but it is waaaay better to just Spoil mobs at lower lvls because they bring in so much more of the resource.

This way even low lvl gatherers can make a ton of money, because the resource is required throughout all crafting tiers and top lvl players don't really get it in huge numbers while farming.

I really hope Intrepid can manage a system similar to this. It mainly works if high lvl players always have something valuable to do and get money from it, while low lvl players can concentrate on gathering and make a ton of money from it.

This is also the reason why I'd prefer for gatherer professions to have a similar setup, where high proficiency artisans have "better" things to do, so the low tier mats are left to the low proficiency players. Though this has other implications for the longevity of the game and potential design workarounds required for this type of system to work.

Yes and no.

L2's crafting and itemization is pretty limited/simplistic. I'd go so far as to call it bad, with my bias.

It's a really long explanation how, but doing this in the way you pointed out leads to poor PvE.

That's why I asked about the specific case I did. It is one of only two ways I know of to make this actually work. L2's works because it's a 'PvP game' with ONE 'crafting class'.

Not gonna fly in Ashes, they have to do better than that, and by 'better' I mean 'don't do that'.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

Not gonna fly in Ashes, they have to do better than that, and by 'better' I mean 'don't do that'.

Yeah, which is why I said that they'd need to design the system in such a way that conceptually it could work like that, but be deeper and better.

In other words, I just want any potential newcomer to be able to get some early money through whichever means they prefer. If the only way to make money on a well-established high lvl server (both artisans and adventurers) is to just do quests and maybe farm mobs - I feel like the whole design of the artisan system will have failed.

Do you agree with that kind of design or do you think it's just not as big of a deal as I think it is?

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Not gonna fly in Ashes, they have to do better than that, and by 'better' I mean 'don't do that'.

Yeah, which is why I said that they'd need to design the system in such a way that conceptually it could work like that, but be deeper and better.

In other words, I just want any potential newcomer to be able to get some early money through whichever means they prefer. If the only way to make money on a well-established high lvl server (both artisans and adventurers) is to just do quests and maybe farm mobs - I feel like the whole design of the artisan system will have failed.

Do you agree with that kind of design or do you think it's just not as big of a deal as I think it is?

I'm referring specifically to 'Spoils on low level ones'.

Low level characters don't need any incentives to stay low level, right?

Low level mobs often die faster, are closer to towns, etc.

So I wasn't really addressing the point of 'low level artisans gather low level materials because high level artisans have better things to do'. I completely agree with it, I was pointing out that L2's system, to someone looking at it with a very critical econ-eye, doesn't actually seem to do that, so the example might be confusing.

But I will give a bit more context.

Economically, games are only really fun for artisans when they get niches. I thought for a LONG time that this was just my bias, but I've since revisited my priors enough to conclude it's just true. There's a sort of 'phantom fun' that people have while leveling up, or dopamine hits, but eventually those wear off and they become increasingly aware of the other, 'better' ways to make money that everyone else is 'using whenever they can'.

This is different from 'having a niche market as your main and the standard market as your fallback'.

If items that are available to low level players are particularly important, niches form much more slowly or not at all. Like I said, this would be another LONG essay. I'm not saying you should 'just trust me on it', but maybe think about it a bit more. The low level mats market should usually be just 'annoying' enough that any new player can make a killing because yes, higher level artisans just rejoice to 'not have to do it themselves'.

But it should also be 'open' enough that there are periods where there's no lowbies around to do it and high level players have to decide 'is the current market supply bust enough to justify me going to do something that is NORMALLY not as profitable, that has another side benefit?'

Because then the people who have a niche that matches the side benefit go first, instead of 'everyone going at once'.

EDIT: Eh, I've realized that this is much less coherent than usual and not really 'answering' anything, so can just be ignored. I'll leave the post in case it helps me sort the thoughts later or becomes relevant.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

If items that are available to low level players are particularly important, niches form much more slowly or not at all. Like I said, this would be another LONG essay. I'm not saying you should 'just trust me on it', but maybe think about it a bit more. The low level mats market should usually be just 'annoying' enough that any new player can make a killing because yes, higher level artisans just rejoice to 'not have to do it themselves'.

But it should also be 'open' enough that there are periods where there's no lowbies around to do it and high level players have to decide 'is the current market supply bust enough to justify me going to do something that is NORMALLY not as profitable, that has another side benefit?'

Because then the people who have a niche that matches the side benefit go first, instead of 'everyone going at once'.

But wouldn't AoC's artisanship already be niche? I'm sure that anyone and everyone would be able to "just cut a tree" or "just pick up a plant", but I'd hope that the system would HIGLY encourage those kinds of actions to be done by specialized artisans because the benefit would be higher.

And so you'd have the most basic stuff getting value from the sheer amounts of demand for it (basic trees/rocks used for sieges in huge amounts, and stuff like that), while anything of a bit higher quality would require specialization. And your progress within the specialization would also dictate the resulting quality of the product.

And as for the openness, I think that could be controlled by the world manager. At the start of the game there will be a ton of newbies farming all of the low tier stuff in huge amounts. This would put a high requirement for those resources within the overall system. In the process of farming most of those newbies would overlvl the abundant sources of those resources and move onto "better" things.

The world manager would see that there's only a few lowbies left and there's only a small trickling of newbies. Seeing that, the WM would increase the yield per resource instance, so that each newbie can get way more resources than the OG could at the same lvl. If the amount of appearing newbies increases, the WM can decrease the yield or the abundance of the resources.

And if there's no one farming some low tier resource for some time (maybe a season or two), the WM could "move" those resources up the chain by one step.

So smth like this:

day1 all flowers X get picked daily, each flower giving 3 petals and a stem. Every day for a few day period the amount of respawning flowers grows, to meet the demand. If on the last day of the period all flowers still get picked - the flowers "die out" for a day or two, making players move up the chain or onto other types of flowers.
day30 60% of flowers X get picked daily, each flower giving 4 petals and the stem is longer now and can be broken into 2 parts
day 100 no lowbies to pick flowers X. The flowers overgrow, become a parasitic invasive species and combine with flowers Y, who're at 50% daily picking. The new XY flowers give 4X petals, 4Y petals and 2 different stems. There's 1 flower X per 10 flowers XY. It gives 10 petals and has a huge branching stem with 4 parts
day 180 there's an expansion and a ton of newbies. They pick up all flowers X for several days in a row, completely resetting their population by triggering the "die out". Those newbies have pushed through the picking lvls faster. Flowers X are now back to being super abundant but also back to their OG form. The lowbie flower pickers have moved onto flowers XY.
day 185+ any newcomers will only be able to pick a fraction of the overabundant flowers X, which will trigger their evolution again.
The cycle, theoretically, repeats

Now there's probably some holes in that suggestion, but my point was mainly about the WM being able to control the resource flow across and within tiers, while also adapting to the player population/actions. And ideally this would also be interlinked with the other branches of the gathering tree (the rabbit/wolf example for the dev stream).

Would you consider that a system that addresses your concerns or did I miss a huge hole in the design that would lead to immediate falling apart of the system?

Azherae

@NiKr to address this one I need to make sure we both have the same understanding of a particular thing...

You will be able to take the 'low levels' of ANY Artisan Profession, right?

Literally everyone in the game will probably be able to hit 'basic rocks'.

Lowbies aren't required. Everyone can hit rocks. Bored people hit rocks as long as hitting rocks is profitable. Those bored people don't necessarily have 'something else to do' or 'a higher artisanship to work on'. They just hit rocks.

Do we disagree on this part?

Child Item