Things we DON'T like about AoC.

While it is important to voice to the developers the things we enjoy about the game, and to encourage the game's creation, it's also equally important to voice our thoughts and opinions on things we don't like about the game and are concerned about.
What are some things you've seen that have you little concerned about or that you simply don't like?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Chicago

Firstly the cosmetic shop needs to be looked at, my issue is even if the cosmetic sets look good, its a stupid game design not being able to mix and match sets, especially if the sets are available at launch it already breaks the immersive feel of progression so why not let us atleast design our own transmogs from sets that we own and should be in our bags? Also i feel as the months drag on the amount of design going into the sets is no where near how it was 2 years ago, if you look at the sets from then compared to now they are not even comparable

Secondly the lack of real information reguarding anything, the live streams are nice and appreciated but the questions people really want answered are being deliberatley left out if the streams and QnAs we are nit asking for a timeline but maybewhats left to do before A2 launch, whats happening onthe progression with naval content etc there are so many un answered questions

effusivemind

Akaime wrote: »

Also i feel as the months drag on the amount of design going into the sets is no where near how it was 2 years ago, if you look at the sets from then compared to now they are not even comparable

My understanding is many of these cosmetic sets will correspond to NPCs in Verra. A majority of them weren't created specifically to be sold as costumes.

So, disliking them is probably more of a reflection of your opinion on that, than anything

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

In the end, it'll come down to the variety of content and variety of locations for said content. Obviously there'll be people who'll leave the game sooner rather than later because their play sessions will get interrupted by pvpers a few too many times, but that'd be inevitable in a game like Ashes.

Actually to be clear I think you have a really good concept of how this should work and I'd absolutely support it, I was moreso noting that IF you are thinking in that way, you have to think about what it is that a non-hardcore PvP player wants.

So I'll add to your model actually.

If Ashes were guaranteed somehow to have such good combat design that most classes that are good in PvE are also good in PvP if they attempt to use specific tactics, I would truly start to believe that it would be a great success with much more people (not necessarily Dygz but certainly some people I know).

The problem is that, as I've said, you are a rarer breed of PvP player, and many of the people on this forum are similar. You know that most PvP players are egomaniacs who actually kinda suck at PvP. I personally feel like Intrepid has a good thing going by 'making a specific type of PvP player so miserable that THEY leave' because it opens options for the sorts of PvP that is 'healthy' for this game type IMO.

And everything you say normally is trying to get to that. I'm suggesting moreso, don't think of PvE-focused players that way (as you admitted) when doing it. Imagine someone whose skill is high enough that they never lose 1v1 or even 1v2, but don't enjoy 1v3 (there always comes a point in game mechanics where this matters, the 1v3 isn't fun because of something).

Then think of what types of experience that person has when they decide 'oh that's a cool mob I think I can solo, I'm gonna try it!' and their 'rivals' decide to find them with their gang of 4.

That's all. When Intrepid has gotten that 1v2-Victory PvP-sometimes player to not go 'meh I'll just go play something else', we're golden.

The answer I'd expect from most people is 'well they should just not travel alone'. This is true! Totally valid. But that's 'dragging someone along to watch your back for 10-20m while you try to solo a super elite mob', because ofc you WANT to see if you can solo it. Maybe that person shouldn't be playing Ashes either, but it'd be nice if somehow we got a game where the PvP egomaniacs just... didn't hang around... or changed their behaviours.

That game just isn't Ashes CURRENTLY. If that player type was 'not in the mood for PvP' and died to the fifth attacker in a string of attackers after killing the other 5 and is just 'tired of this now' and is trying to walk home since no fast Travel and keeps getting attacked by the five they beat up, it doesn't matter if they just beat them up again.

effusivemind

Azherae wrote: »

You know that most PvP players are egomaniacs who actually kinda suck at PvP.

Feeling personally attacked ngl

Azherae

effusivemind wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

You know that most PvP players are egomaniacs who actually kinda suck at PvP.

Feeling personally attacked ngl

I'm sure you're one of the real ones who dunks on them 24/7 and shows them that they're not actually that good.

Please keep doing that.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

The answer I'd expect from most people is 'well they should just not travel alone'. This is true! Totally valid. But that's 'dragging someone along to watch your back for 10-20m while you try to solo a super elite mob', because ofc you WANT to see if you can solo it. Maybe that person shouldn't be playing Ashes either, but it'd be nice if somehow we got a game where the PvP egomaniacs just... didn't hang around... or changed their behaviours.

What if there was an automatic quest system (probably tied to religious organizations) that provide basic mini quests for elite mobs in the area (as soon as those spawn). And when you take this quest you can either take a party version (with much higher rewards to encourage it) or a solo one. And the solo version would give you a priest NPC who'd go with you to the mob and control surrounding mobs to fight anyone else in the nearest vicinity except you (control would be done through essence/corruption magic or whatever fits the lore). So in a way you'd have some basic protection against small groups of attackers, while you attempt to solo the mob.
A bigger party would still be able to just overpower the mobs and remove you if needed.

Iirc the first Guild Wars could provide players with npc companions if the player didn't have anyone else to group up with. And while Ashes is obviously not quite that type of game, I think a similar system but with a much smaller scale could provide a much broader gameplay variety to solo players, while not necessarily replacing groups (cause it'd decrease rewards tied to its content).

We know that Intrepid plans on giving us NPCs to work our stalls and even our freehold lands, so I don't think that making a "follower" npc, that then casts a single spell when he reaches his quest marker, would be out of the range of what developers can do.

Considering that most mobs are supposed to be hard already, I'd imagine that elite adds or just mobs around the elite one could put up a good fight against some basic low-mid skill pvpers, so the solo pver would have a chance to do some high skill content w/o it being instanced.

What do you think, would this be too convoluted? Or maybe too "green-appeasing"?

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

The answer I'd expect from most people is 'well they should just not travel alone'. This is true! Totally valid. But that's 'dragging someone along to watch your back for 10-20m while you try to solo a super elite mob', because ofc you WANT to see if you can solo it. Maybe that person shouldn't be playing Ashes either, but it'd be nice if somehow we got a game where the PvP egomaniacs just... didn't hang around... or changed their behaviours.

What if there was an automatic quest system (probably tied to religious organizations) that provide basic mini quests for elite mobs in the area (as soon as those spawn). And when you take this quest you can either take a party version (with much higher rewards to encourage it) or a solo one. And the solo version would give you a priest NPC who'd go with you to the mob and control surrounding mobs to fight anyone else in the nearest vicinity except you (control would be done through essence/corruption magic or whatever fits the lore). So in a way you'd have some basic protection against small groups of attackers, while you attempt to solo the mob.
A bigger party would still be able to just overpower the mobs and remove you if needed.

Iirc the first Guild Wars could provide players with npc companions if the player didn't have anyone else to group up with. And while Ashes is obviously not quite that type of game, I think a similar system but with a much smaller scale could provide a much broader gameplay variety to solo players, while not necessarily replacing groups (cause it'd decrease rewards tied to its content).

We know that Intrepid plans on giving us NPCs to work our stalls and even our freehold lands, so I don't think that making a "follower" npc, that then casts a single spell when he reaches his quest marker, would be out of the range of what developers can do.

Considering that most mobs are supposed to be hard already, I'd imagine that elite adds or just mobs around the elite one could put up a good fight against some basic low-mid skill pvpers, so the solo pver would have a chance to do some high skill content w/o it being instanced.

What do you think, would this be too convoluted? Or maybe too "green-appeasing"?

Too deep now.

Who even gets the quest 'first' anyway? What happens if the mob has already been engaged but not defeated when you arrive?

Etc etc.

But it probably wouldn't cause the player type to not just go run Memorials in TL instead when that mood struck them.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

Too deep now.

Who even gets the quest 'first' anyway? What happens if the mob has already been engaged but not defeated when you arrive?

Etc etc.

But it probably wouldn't cause the player type to not just go run Memorials in TL instead when that mood struck them.

Do you think that type of player would be interested in purely the challenge of it all? Cause the idea could be inversed. You first gotta beat the elite with a group. It'd give you an item that you could then give to your religion's NPC and make him summon the same mob, but either with no rewards or maybe just with different ones.

Tie that to a particular freehold building and you got yourself a cost for the reward and a pvp-less location to summon the mob. Though this might be too money/time-gated for most people. Freeholds will most likely be quite expensive.

I just don't think you can completely remove the agro pvpers from a pvp game that supports continuous attacks against any person w/o any real consequence

You can obviously limit how far they can go and Ashes already does that, but unless you change the corruption gain mechanics to "on hit" - ya ain't really getting a game for skilled pvers who might not be in the mood to suffer several pvp attacks in a row.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

I just don't think you can completely remove the agro pvpers from a pvp game that supports continuous attacks against any person w/o any real consequence You can obviously limit how far they can go and Ashes already does that, but unless you change the corruption gain mechanics to "on hit" - ya ain't really getting a game for skilled pvers who might not be in the mood to suffer several pvp attacks in a row.

In a word... yes.

This is why I'm saying that there's no way Intrepid even WANTS that player type (in the sense that, they will support their playstyle even slightly above the alternative).

Making a corruption system that would lead to MORE PvP while actually deterring 'annoying attacks' might not be easy, but it certainly isn't hard ENOUGH that they wouldn't have changed it somewhat by now.

It functions the way it does by design. You often make suggestions that would make the game more palatable to certain player types, yet if Intrepid really wanted that to be the case, they'd probably just change Corruption itself.

That's why you get pushback from the game's Core Audience, basically. As it should be.

As for this part:

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Too deep now.

Who even gets the quest 'first' anyway? What happens if the mob has already been engaged but not defeated when you arrive?

Etc etc.

But it probably wouldn't cause the player type to not just go run Memorials in TL instead when that mood struck them.

Do you think that type of player would be interested in purely the challenge of it all? Cause the idea could be inversed. You first gotta beat the elite with a group. It'd give you an item that you could then give to your religion's NPC and make him summon the same mob, but either with no rewards or maybe just with different ones.

Kinda, but not really. If it were me the answer would be that I'd be 'too interested'. It's 'immersive' to go solo Katzvariak when it appears, but it wouldn't be immersive to just 'summon it' from beating it, but it's hard to explain why. Something to do with the 'organic' nature of 'how ready you are when you come across it', or something like that. Making it equal to 'instanced fight' (Memorials) rather than organic/natural fight (Elites/Open World Notorious Monsters)

But I don't know the precise reasons for others. Maybe it would work out for them.

Strevi

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

It is in this way that Ashes is designed for the 'hardcore PvP-er'. The person who goes to an area seeking PvP or PvE content in equal measure at minimum. They don't have an 'intent to enjoy the PvE content', they'll take whichever they get.

Yeah, I guess this is the core point here. Because as I see it, if to that green pacifist the most interesting content is happening somewhere dangerous - the pacifist will probably just play another game. I'm probably just generalizing non-pvpers too much, because 99% of my mmo experience has been with pvxers so I got zero real clue how non-pvpers play games. I just imagine a carebear who's enjoying their 1-2h of chill fishing or simpler solo mobs on the plains, rather than some hardcore pver who's deep in a dungeon fighting the strongest mobs in the game.
.

Chilling is against the risk vs reward pillar of the game.
We can imagine the possibility to add a small pond to freeholds to fish 1-2 hours but only small gold fish not legendary drops.
And then if that node will be full of such players, it will fall fast at the first siege. And the freehold soon after that, with our chill fisher inside.

If soloers can thrive in this game then also the player interaction pillar failed
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_interaction

It can indeed happen that the game fails because the game pillars.
Should we worry and try to save it and change them?
For me the value of this game is because these design pillars and Steven saying that he will try making an MMO based on them even if other MMOs discarded them to favor profit.

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

What if there was an automatic quest system (probably tied to religious organizations) that provide basic mini quests for elite mobs in the area (as soon as those spawn). And when you take this quest you can either take a party version (with much higher rewards to encourage it) or a solo one. And the solo version would give you a priest NPC who'd go with you to the mob and control surrounding mobs to fight anyone else in the nearest vicinity except you (control would be done through essence/corruption magic or whatever fits the lore). So in a way you'd have some basic protection against small groups of attackers, while you attempt to solo the mob.
A bigger party would still be able to just overpower the mobs and remove you if needed.

What do you think, would this be too convoluted? Or maybe too "green-appeasing"?

I think it's just not necessary.
Ashes is designed for highly competitive, hardcore gamers who love the adrenaline rush of PvP.
I play RPGs to emulate the Fantasy novels I read. And those Fantasy novels are about diverse people coming together to defeat a major threat - not the competition of who can defeat the threat first and gain all the loot.
To me, the server should be focused on cooperating to put an end to the Perpetual Winter that will remain in effect until the Winter Dragon is defeated; rather than trying to kill any "rival" player who might gain all the loot from the Winter Dragon.
WoW: Dragonflight is providing exactly the experience I've been craving - where both the Horde and the Alliance work together to defeat the common threat(s) during World Quests. And, since I'm on a PvE-Only server, PvP is barely even a possibility... I can completely ignore PvP.

I don't want to have to feel like I need protection from other players while I'm striving to defeat mobs.
PvPers think of "protection" from PvP - typically in the form of players who act as Anti-PvPer mercenaries. I think Non-Combatant PvEers are not really interested in mobs "protecting" them from PvP or other players "protecting" them from PvP.

The concept of removing competition from farming areas is not at all appealing to me. Quite the opposite.
Defending Caravans is appealing. Siege Defense is appealing.
Removing rival players from an area because Land Management dictates that depleted resources will trigger an Environmental Catastrophe is appealing. Where the focus of PvP is on the health of the region/Node; not pwning other players.

Ashes is designed for gamers who love EvE Online, Lineage II and ArcheAge. I think those gamers don't need a protection system.
Ashes is not really designed for players who love EQ, WoW and FFXIV. And I think the devs probably should not add systems to try to appeal to the players who have chosen not to play EvE Online, Lineage II and ArcheAge. Ashes is not designed for everyone. And that's OK.

JamesSunderland

Dygz wrote: »

Ashes is designed for gamers who love EvE Online, Lineage II and ArcheAge. I think those gamers don't need a protection system.

I cannot speak for EvE but, Lineage 2 and Archeage had protection system, in the form of the Karma System for L2 and Peace/War zone time cycles, so even "those gamers" are accustomed to a certain level of protection.

Dygz wrote: »

Ashes is not really designed for players who love EQ, WoW and FFXIV.

This statement is a bit too broad and general in my eyes, do you truly believe there are no pieces of design in Ashes that looks attractive to any EQ, WoW and FFXIV lovers?

Dygz wrote: »

And I think the devs probably should not add systems to try to appeal to the players who have chosen not to play EvE Online, Lineage II and ArcheAge.

Any specific reason why? Even the ones that even tho good for them did not outweigh the other systems that made them choose not to play?

Strevi

Dygz wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

What if there was an automatic quest system (probably tied to religious organizations) that provide basic mini quests for elite mobs in the area (as soon as those spawn). And when you take this quest you can either take a party version (with much higher rewards to encourage it) or a solo one. And the solo version would give you a priest NPC who'd go with you to the mob and control surrounding mobs to fight anyone else in the nearest vicinity except you (control would be done through essence/corruption magic or whatever fits the lore). So in a way you'd have some basic protection against small groups of attackers, while you attempt to solo the mob.
A bigger party would still be able to just overpower the mobs and remove you if needed.

What do you think, would this be too convoluted? Or maybe too "green-appeasing"?

I think it's just not necessary.
Ashes is designed for highly competitive, hardcore gamers who love the adrenaline rush of PvP.

Loving the adrenaline rush of PvP does not make one "highly competitive, hardcore gamer".
The other way arround might also not be always true. Those truly competitive would train and that would become routine.

Do you like adrenaline rush?
What triggers it in your case?

Dygz

JamesSunderland wrote: »

I cannot speak for EvE but, Lineage 2 and Archeage had protection system, in the form of the Karma System for L2 and Peace/War zone time cycles, so even "those gamers" are accustomed to a certain level of protection.

By protection system, I mean where mobs or NPCs are literally acting to protect the player - like NiKr proposed.

JamesSunderland wrote: »

This statement is a bit too broad and general in my eyes, do you truly believe there are no pieces of design in Ashes that looks attractive to any EQ, WoW and FFXIV lovers?

I didn't say that no pieces of design in Ashes look attractive to any EQ, WoW and FFXIV.
That statement would be very specific, rather than broad.
So...
1: Yes. I am aware I made a generalization, rather than an absolute.
2: When I'm posting after a 10+ hours of work and 2 hours of dance class, I'm going to trust that most people here can comprehend the nuance based on the context of the discussion.
Though, it is, of course, always OK to ask for clarification.
In context - EQ, WoW and FFXIV have PvE-Only servers.

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Any specific reason why? Even the ones that even tho good for them did not outweigh the other systems that made them choose not to play?

Here I'm, again, specifically referring to NiKr's proposal of adding a system where mobs actively "protecting" Greens from PvP. It's not necessary because the issue for those who have chosen not to play EvE, Lineage II and ArcheAge is not about "protection". Protection is the wrong concept... and something that PvPers focus on because it typically implies that they will get to do more PvP as they "protect" PK victims.
Whereas non-PvPers really just want to be able to at least turn-off PvP flagging altogether...or play on a server where PvP is not even possible.
You can't really appease those players, anyway.
Yes. Lineage II had Karma. And Corruption is supposed to be even harsher than Karma. But, Corruption is not really going to entice people who refused to play Lineage II to play Ashes. And Intrepid doesn't need to add more systems than the original design already had in order to try to entice players who don't enjoy EvE, Lineage II and ArcheAge.
Steven should continue to cater to his target audience - which is really EvE, Lineage II and ArcheAge fans.

effusivemind

Azherae wrote: »

I'm sure you're one of the real ones who dunks on them 24/7 and shows them that they're not actually that good.

Please keep doing that.

"Real one" sounds like a pretty rad title.

Maybe we'll get to find out

Dygz

Strevi wrote: »

Loving the adrenaline rush of PvP does not make one "highly competitive, hardcore gamer".
The other way arround might also not be always true. Those truly competitive would train and that would become routine.

I disagree. Loving the adrenaline rush of PvP is hardcore and competitive - as opposed to casual and chill.
Steven believes that the adrenaline rush from PvP and risk reward vs other players is the best of the gaming experience and that those are the moments that are most memorable in MMORPGs.
One of the things Steven loves most when playing MMORPGs is griefing other players.
And, while, Steven and Margaret and the Intrepid devs are hoping most players won't play the way Steven used to... the games they love most are competitive games where they can pwn other gamers... and trash talk them while doing so.

Strevi wrote: »

Do you like adrenaline rush?
What triggers it in your case?

Momentary adrenaline rush can be OK in MMORPGs, but it's probably about as low as can be on my list of interests.
The adrenaline rush I like is when a mob casts Blind on me and I have to work a bit harder to not die while Blind. Or when a mob casts Fear on me and I have to try to make sure my avatar doesn't run off a cliff or into more mobs. Or when a bunch of ground telegraphs appear and I have to quickly maneuver a safe path away from damage. But, even Wildstar went way to crazy with the telegraph patterns for my liking.
Sure, when a game can momentarily get my physical body to duck and weave in a vain attempt to help my avatar escape from a dicey scenario, that can be fun... but that is far from the core of why I play MMORPGs.

I play MMORPGs to virtually experience the stories I read in Fantasy novels.
And adrenaline rush from competition with other people is not what entices me to read Fantasy novels.
Adrenaline rush from competition with other people is not what entices me to play RPGs.

The PvP I sometimes enjoy is city/town defense.
In Alpha 1, Castle Sieges were fun.
I expect Caravans and Node Sieges would also be fun.
Just not fun enough for me to play a game that also has permanent auto-flag (Combatant) PvP zones.

If I wanted the adrenaline rush from PvP, I would probably play an MMOFPS or a MOBA.
Not an MMORPG.

Ludullu

Strevi wrote: »

It can indeed happen that the game fails because the game pillars.
Should we worry and try to save it and change them?
For me the value of this game is because these design pillars and Steven saying that he will try making an MMO based on them even if other MMOs discarded them to favor profit.

I think we can highly promote and encourage interaction with those pillars, while still supporting several different gameplay styles. And that's kinda what Intrepid are already plan on doing.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

It can indeed happen that the game fails because the game pillars.
Should we worry and try to save it and change them?
For me the value of this game is because these design pillars and Steven saying that he will try making an MMO based on them even if other MMOs discarded them to favor profit.

I think we can highly promote and encourage interaction with those pillars, while still supporting several different gameplay styles. And that's kinda what Intrepid are already plan on doing.

This isn't even a question, I think.

A player being told 'you can't progress down this path unless you engage in this content type' isn't weird. All you have to do is make sure that the players who want to progress path A also generally accept/like content-gate A that goes with it.

This is a 'matching game' problem, for most MMOs, not a content problem. There's almost always a way to match your content types to your paths, even within an MMO.

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

I think we can highly promote and encourage interaction with those pillars, while still supporting several different gameplay styles. And that's kinda what Intrepid are already plan on doing.

Steven also planned to release Ashes before 2020.

Songcaller

Dygz wrote: »

Steven also planned to release Ashes before 2020.

Thankfully higher wisdom prevailed or we would have been stuck with the quick time combat lol.

Child Item