George_Black wrote: » deadmansprice wrote: » George_Black wrote: » deadmansprice wrote: » Lads, let's just chill a bit. While it's fine to argue about things, it's best to keep it civil. We all have different opinions on what we see on Steven's vision and the direction of Ashes, and while it's true that Ashes is geared towards a very specific audience, being very aggressive with someone is not productive I am not aggressive. I am confronting peoples claims. I will leave it at that, since I noticed that you are a mod, and perhaps somebody has felt wrong by me and brought this to your attention. It's fine to argue about things, it's just better not to be too direct atleast. It's no issue when you're making firm statements on how things should be from your perspective. I'm just trying to make sure this thread is productive. At the end of the day, even though Ashes is geared towards to a specific audience, there'll be something for everyone, even casuals. can do. I won't derail this thread any further. And on that note, we do have A2 for a long while, which will allow Intrepid to gather our feedbacks and ensure we get meaningful PvP, and also meaningful freeholds, castles and nodes. While I personally think Intrepid will find a way to sort out the zergfest and large guild numbers, how would you want them to do it? What would be the best way in your opinion? Remove the ability of people to assign FH "privileges" to guild members, because the number of guild members could reach 1000 or so. Restrict the ability of people to assign FH "privileges" to family members only, since family members are capped at 8 or so. This way a guild of 50-80 members has 10 familes which potentially own 10 freeholds. Real tight community of real friends. A true guild. Even if they have less FH that let's say 10, this smaller number of guild members can alternate their access to a FH and use it, by rotating family memberships. A zerg-guild should not be allowed to achieve the same productivity. The way is to deter people from wanting to join a large guild to find safety and comfort in large numbers, unearned strength in mindless AoE numbers. How do you deter people from joining a zerg guild? You show them that they won't get to enjoy FHs owned by the guild. Only the core members will, even though everybody feeds the money machine. Or... they can wait for in a looooong queue to rotate family memberships. Zerg guilds need to be addressed. Look at every mmo. There is no counter to when a large guild full of strangers, steamrolls every proud, skilled guild with numbers 10-1. Steven has said that smaller guilds will be empowered to counter larger guilds. I think a great method to do that is to show the players in Vera that joining a large guild will most likely exclude you from FH gameplay.
deadmansprice wrote: » George_Black wrote: » deadmansprice wrote: » Lads, let's just chill a bit. While it's fine to argue about things, it's best to keep it civil. We all have different opinions on what we see on Steven's vision and the direction of Ashes, and while it's true that Ashes is geared towards a very specific audience, being very aggressive with someone is not productive I am not aggressive. I am confronting peoples claims. I will leave it at that, since I noticed that you are a mod, and perhaps somebody has felt wrong by me and brought this to your attention. It's fine to argue about things, it's just better not to be too direct atleast. It's no issue when you're making firm statements on how things should be from your perspective. I'm just trying to make sure this thread is productive. At the end of the day, even though Ashes is geared towards to a specific audience, there'll be something for everyone, even casuals. can do. I won't derail this thread any further. And on that note, we do have A2 for a long while, which will allow Intrepid to gather our feedbacks and ensure we get meaningful PvP, and also meaningful freeholds, castles and nodes. While I personally think Intrepid will find a way to sort out the zergfest and large guild numbers, how would you want them to do it? What would be the best way in your opinion?
George_Black wrote: » deadmansprice wrote: » Lads, let's just chill a bit. While it's fine to argue about things, it's best to keep it civil. We all have different opinions on what we see on Steven's vision and the direction of Ashes, and while it's true that Ashes is geared towards a very specific audience, being very aggressive with someone is not productive I am not aggressive. I am confronting peoples claims. I will leave it at that, since I noticed that you are a mod, and perhaps somebody has felt wrong by me and brought this to your attention.
deadmansprice wrote: » Lads, let's just chill a bit. While it's fine to argue about things, it's best to keep it civil. We all have different opinions on what we see on Steven's vision and the direction of Ashes, and while it's true that Ashes is geared towards a very specific audience, being very aggressive with someone is not productive
Raven016 wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question. Ok. What was the original question? Ah yes Freeholds should not be for mega guilds. Mega guilds should get something even better. They get castles. Fewer in number, but with most prestige. And I will assume they will have crazy money making features just like in L2. The FHs however is something that smaller, but competitive communities can look forward to. I am sure all of you, casuals or competitive have sat down and said to your inrl friends, "how good would it be if we could build and defend a home, with activities with which we can make gold". And no mmos has ever done it. They are all cosmetics and decorations and DPS test dummies, and they are solo. I have played ESO for 6 years and I used other peoples houses to DPS parse (since I could not be bothered even with the free home and dummie I was given as a participation trophy) and I never ecnountered anyone in those homes, full of decor. And the times that the guilds would invite people over to someones home, I said to my self "why? why would I go there? What's there to play with?" AoC has meaningful FHs. AoC is aimed at competitive players. It makes sense to create sought after, hard earned FHs. But there need to be protections from the zerg guilds. People always complain about zergs and zombie armies and aoe lagfest, but nobody, during the development tries to find ways to counter the MASSIVE benefit of sheer numbers on your side. If anything IS said "what would make it better to run a big guild??" Mistake. Large guilds are a problem for any meaningful independence of real communities, meaningful guild memberships. We need to address the FH situation. Have you regularity payed money to a streamer? I did. Not mmo players though. But I can imagine a popular streamer, or a few of them joining together onto the same server. You want the game to make their life hard and force them to split their community somehow? Or punish their followers if they play on the same server in their guild? The game offers the framework and players use it as they want. You can chose to join a server where the chaos is higher. Maybe it will take some time to find the right server and you will have to give up the one you started on, right after release... but if you want to play a few years long, it is worth doing it. Hopefully will be more servers to try out. But I am fine with one too. Maybe I will stay with the players from the Alpha 2 server.
George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question. Ok. What was the original question? Ah yes Freeholds should not be for mega guilds. Mega guilds should get something even better. They get castles. Fewer in number, but with most prestige. And I will assume they will have crazy money making features just like in L2. The FHs however is something that smaller, but competitive communities can look forward to. I am sure all of you, casuals or competitive have sat down and said to your inrl friends, "how good would it be if we could build and defend a home, with activities with which we can make gold". And no mmos has ever done it. They are all cosmetics and decorations and DPS test dummies, and they are solo. I have played ESO for 6 years and I used other peoples houses to DPS parse (since I could not be bothered even with the free home and dummie I was given as a participation trophy) and I never ecnountered anyone in those homes, full of decor. And the times that the guilds would invite people over to someones home, I said to my self "why? why would I go there? What's there to play with?" AoC has meaningful FHs. AoC is aimed at competitive players. It makes sense to create sought after, hard earned FHs. But there need to be protections from the zerg guilds. People always complain about zergs and zombie armies and aoe lagfest, but nobody, during the development tries to find ways to counter the MASSIVE benefit of sheer numbers on your side. If anything IS said "what would make it better to run a big guild??" Mistake. Large guilds are a problem for any meaningful independence of real communities, meaningful guild memberships. We need to address the FH situation.
Raven016 wrote: » Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question. Ok. What was the original question? Ah yes Freeholds should not be for mega guilds. Mega guilds should get something even better.
Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question.
Sathrago wrote: » George_Black wrote: » deadmansprice wrote: » George_Black wrote: » deadmansprice wrote: » Lads, let's just chill a bit. While it's fine to argue about things, it's best to keep it civil. We all have different opinions on what we see on Steven's vision and the direction of Ashes, and while it's true that Ashes is geared towards a very specific audience, being very aggressive with someone is not productive I am not aggressive. I am confronting peoples claims. I will leave it at that, since I noticed that you are a mod, and perhaps somebody has felt wrong by me and brought this to your attention. It's fine to argue about things, it's just better not to be too direct atleast. It's no issue when you're making firm statements on how things should be from your perspective. I'm just trying to make sure this thread is productive. At the end of the day, even though Ashes is geared towards to a specific audience, there'll be something for everyone, even casuals. can do. I won't derail this thread any further. And on that note, we do have A2 for a long while, which will allow Intrepid to gather our feedbacks and ensure we get meaningful PvP, and also meaningful freeholds, castles and nodes. While I personally think Intrepid will find a way to sort out the zergfest and large guild numbers, how would you want them to do it? What would be the best way in your opinion? Remove the ability of people to assign FH "privileges" to guild members, because the number of guild members could reach 1000 or so. Restrict the ability of people to assign FH "privileges" to family members only, since family members are capped at 8 or so. This way a guild of 50-80 members has 10 familes which potentially own 10 freeholds. Real tight community of real friends. A true guild. Even if they have less FH that let's say 10, this smaller number of guild members can alternate their access to a FH and use it, by rotating family memberships. A zerg-guild should not be allowed to achieve the same productivity. The way is to deter people from wanting to join a large guild to find safety and comfort in large numbers, unearned strength in mindless AoE numbers. How do you deter people from joining a zerg guild? You show them that they won't get to enjoy FHs owned by the guild. Only the core members will, even though everybody feeds the money machine. Or... they can wait for in a looooong queue to rotate family memberships. Zerg guilds need to be addressed. Look at every mmo. There is no counter to when a large guild full of strangers, steamrolls every proud, skilled guild with numbers 10-1. Steven has said that smaller guilds will be empowered to counter larger guilds. I think a great method to do that is to show the players in Vera that joining a large guild will most likely exclude you from FH gameplay. What if being apart of a guild was a requirement to place a freehold, but the guild talents had to sacrifice member space in order to increase the amount of people allowed to use a Freehold? Don't take this question too seriously, I just woke up and its the first thing I thought up when I read your idea. I don't like the idea of freeholds being locked to family only, I like the freedom to give at least guild members access. I do however understand your take on mega-guilds as well. So if freehold placement requires guild membership and that talent point that would normally go towards growth, you would end up with medium sized guilds that have a few freeholds spread across 100-200 players rather than restricted to 10 per estate. but yeah, let me know your thoughts.
George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question. Ok. What was the original question? Ah yes Freeholds should not be for mega guilds. Mega guilds should get something even better. They get castles. Fewer in number, but with most prestige. And I will assume they will have crazy money making features just like in L2. The FHs however is something that smaller, but competitive communities can look forward to. I am sure all of you, casuals or competitive have sat down and said to your inrl friends, "how good would it be if we could build and defend a home, with activities with which we can make gold". And no mmos has ever done it. They are all cosmetics and decorations and DPS test dummies, and they are solo. I have played ESO for 6 years and I used other peoples houses to DPS parse (since I could not be bothered even with the free home and dummie I was given as a participation trophy) and I never ecnountered anyone in those homes, full of decor. And the times that the guilds would invite people over to someones home, I said to my self "why? why would I go there? What's there to play with?" AoC has meaningful FHs. AoC is aimed at competitive players. It makes sense to create sought after, hard earned FHs. But there need to be protections from the zerg guilds. People always complain about zergs and zombie armies and aoe lagfest, but nobody, during the development tries to find ways to counter the MASSIVE benefit of sheer numbers on your side. If anything IS said "what would make it better to run a big guild??" Mistake. Large guilds are a problem for any meaningful independence of real communities, meaningful guild memberships. We need to address the FH situation. Have you regularity payed money to a streamer? I did. Not mmo players though. But I can imagine a popular streamer, or a few of them joining together onto the same server. You want the game to make their life hard and force them to split their community somehow? Or punish their followers if they play on the same server in their guild? The game offers the framework and players use it as they want. You can chose to join a server where the chaos is higher. Maybe it will take some time to find the right server and you will have to give up the one you started on, right after release... but if you want to play a few years long, it is worth doing it. Hopefully will be more servers to try out. But I am fine with one too. Maybe I will stay with the players from the Alpha 2 server. Lemme stop you right there, when I sit down on the PC I play the game with my friends or alone (singleplayer) and that's it. What streamers are you talking about? Why are you paying a streamer? What kind of joke is this? Pay him for what? What did they do for me? People have been playing mmos before streamers and waaaaaaay before people started throwing money to someone on the other side of the planet, watching him play games. IS, which is developing a passion project, doesn't have to take into consideration any streamers. Steven is attending online personas in order to promote his game, and in return he is honoring them with his presence, whilst driving up their view numbers. Fair exchange, and that's where it stops.
Boneshatter wrote: » Likely the best way to limit giant guilds is to make the talent/perk points for smaller guilds really strong.
Boneshatter wrote: » Likely the best way to limit giant guilds is to make the talent/perk points for smaller guilds really strong. If the big guilds are spending points to boost their members from 50 to 300 the perks for the smaller guilds should be comparable. Comparable to the point that a full guild vs guild will favor the larger guild, but a small skirmish will favor the smaller guild.
Raven016 wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question. Ok. What was the original question? Ah yes Freeholds should not be for mega guilds. Mega guilds should get something even better. They get castles. Fewer in number, but with most prestige. And I will assume they will have crazy money making features just like in L2. The FHs however is something that smaller, but competitive communities can look forward to. I am sure all of you, casuals or competitive have sat down and said to your inrl friends, "how good would it be if we could build and defend a home, with activities with which we can make gold". And no mmos has ever done it. They are all cosmetics and decorations and DPS test dummies, and they are solo. I have played ESO for 6 years and I used other peoples houses to DPS parse (since I could not be bothered even with the free home and dummie I was given as a participation trophy) and I never ecnountered anyone in those homes, full of decor. And the times that the guilds would invite people over to someones home, I said to my self "why? why would I go there? What's there to play with?" AoC has meaningful FHs. AoC is aimed at competitive players. It makes sense to create sought after, hard earned FHs. But there need to be protections from the zerg guilds. People always complain about zergs and zombie armies and aoe lagfest, but nobody, during the development tries to find ways to counter the MASSIVE benefit of sheer numbers on your side. If anything IS said "what would make it better to run a big guild??" Mistake. Large guilds are a problem for any meaningful independence of real communities, meaningful guild memberships. We need to address the FH situation. Have you regularity payed money to a streamer? I did. Not mmo players though. But I can imagine a popular streamer, or a few of them joining together onto the same server. You want the game to make their life hard and force them to split their community somehow? Or punish their followers if they play on the same server in their guild? The game offers the framework and players use it as they want. You can chose to join a server where the chaos is higher. Maybe it will take some time to find the right server and you will have to give up the one you started on, right after release... but if you want to play a few years long, it is worth doing it. Hopefully will be more servers to try out. But I am fine with one too. Maybe I will stay with the players from the Alpha 2 server. Lemme stop you right there, when I sit down on the PC I play the game with my friends or alone (singleplayer) and that's it. What streamers are you talking about? Why are you paying a streamer? What kind of joke is this? Pay him for what? What did they do for me? People have been playing mmos before streamers and waaaaaaay before people started throwing money to someone on the other side of the planet, watching him play games. IS, which is developing a passion project, doesn't have to take into consideration any streamers. Steven is attending online personas in order to promote his game, and in return he is honoring them with his presence, whilst driving up their view numbers. Fair exchange, and that's where it stops. You definitely do not understand that kind of people. But "waaaaaaay before..." the guild leader had only the game as a medium to interact with their followers. They are skilled at creating a community. Just like creating a company, some end up with a small one others becomes more popular. Take Twitch and Youtube away from them and they may still be good guild leaders if they can organize or find somebody who can. You are at a disadvantage playing only with your friends, unless you have many of them. I understand now why you think big guilds need to be stopped. But Steven wants to drive them away too?
George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Raven016 wrote: » Shabooey wrote: » Ah right ok I think I get you. Know one really knows what they would do in a life or death situation and I sincerely hope that no one on these forums are ever put in a position where they have to find out. Now I think it's best, after that quite frankly ridiculously crazy tangent, we focus the discussion of this thread back to the original question. Ok. What was the original question? Ah yes Freeholds should not be for mega guilds. Mega guilds should get something even better. They get castles. Fewer in number, but with most prestige. And I will assume they will have crazy money making features just like in L2. The FHs however is something that smaller, but competitive communities can look forward to. I am sure all of you, casuals or competitive have sat down and said to your inrl friends, "how good would it be if we could build and defend a home, with activities with which we can make gold". And no mmos has ever done it. They are all cosmetics and decorations and DPS test dummies, and they are solo. I have played ESO for 6 years and I used other peoples houses to DPS parse (since I could not be bothered even with the free home and dummie I was given as a participation trophy) and I never ecnountered anyone in those homes, full of decor. And the times that the guilds would invite people over to someones home, I said to my self "why? why would I go there? What's there to play with?" AoC has meaningful FHs. AoC is aimed at competitive players. It makes sense to create sought after, hard earned FHs. But there need to be protections from the zerg guilds. People always complain about zergs and zombie armies and aoe lagfest, but nobody, during the development tries to find ways to counter the MASSIVE benefit of sheer numbers on your side. If anything IS said "what would make it better to run a big guild??" Mistake. Large guilds are a problem for any meaningful independence of real communities, meaningful guild memberships. We need to address the FH situation. Have you regularity payed money to a streamer? I did. Not mmo players though. But I can imagine a popular streamer, or a few of them joining together onto the same server. You want the game to make their life hard and force them to split their community somehow? Or punish their followers if they play on the same server in their guild? The game offers the framework and players use it as they want. You can chose to join a server where the chaos is higher. Maybe it will take some time to find the right server and you will have to give up the one you started on, right after release... but if you want to play a few years long, it is worth doing it. Hopefully will be more servers to try out. But I am fine with one too. Maybe I will stay with the players from the Alpha 2 server. Lemme stop you right there, when I sit down on the PC I play the game with my friends or alone (singleplayer) and that's it. What streamers are you talking about? Why are you paying a streamer? What kind of joke is this? Pay him for what? What did they do for me? People have been playing mmos before streamers and waaaaaaay before people started throwing money to someone on the other side of the planet, watching him play games. IS, which is developing a passion project, doesn't have to take into consideration any streamers. Steven is attending online personas in order to promote his game, and in return he is honoring them with his presence, whilst driving up their view numbers. Fair exchange, and that's where it stops. You definitely do not understand that kind of people. But "waaaaaaay before..." the guild leader had only the game as a medium to interact with their followers. They are skilled at creating a community. Just like creating a company, some end up with a small one others becomes more popular. Take Twitch and Youtube away from them and they may still be good guild leaders if they can organize or find somebody who can. You are at a disadvantage playing only with your friends, unless you have many of them. I understand now why you think big guilds need to be stopped. But Steven wants to drive them away too? Hahahahahahahaha!!! There are no good mmos to play out there and you believe that ANYBODY will turn down AoC when it releases? Everybody and their gamer grandmother will play. Whoever says I won't play is lying to themselves.
George_Black wrote: » Hahahahahahahaha!!! There are no good mmos to play out there and you believe that ANYBODY will turn down AoC when it releases? Everybody and their gamer grandmother will play. Whoever says I won't play is lying to themselves.
Liniker wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » I think it'll hurt the game overall to make an aspect of the game inaccessible to a major portion of players. Especially the players that would see that as their favorite part of the game. WoW doesn't have housing, GW2, plenty of games, housing is not something that can make or break a game. Never in history of humanity a good MMO failed because of not having housing / having bad housing or anything housing related. And if we start talking about OPEN WORLD Land / Housing 99% of games don't even have it. and BTW, Ashes WILL have instanced and node housing for everyone - it's just the freeholds. I'm sorry guys y'all are absolutely out of touch with reality if you think enough people care about this for limited freeholds even be an issue for the game. It's just getting to a point it's annoying to read the same things being repeated again, if freeholds is the hill you want to die one that's fine, just go play Palia, I can guarantee 100% Ashes will be fine, because there are enough people that want Meaningful, limited systems in an MMO.
SirChancelot wrote: » I think it'll hurt the game overall to make an aspect of the game inaccessible to a major portion of players. Especially the players that would see that as their favorite part of the game.
George_Black wrote: » Boneshatter wrote: » Likely the best way to limit giant guilds is to make the talent/perk points for smaller guilds really strong. If the big guilds are spending points to boost their members from 50 to 300 the perks for the smaller guilds should be comparable. Comparable to the point that a full guild vs guild will favor the larger guild, but a small skirmish will favor the smaller guild. What if large guilds, named Mafia, Mafia1, Mafia2, Mafia3, Mafia4 all have small individual numbers, with great passive skills, yet by Mafia10 they have the numbers too?
Boneshatter wrote: » GW2 has housing, it's mostly irrelevant.
Liniker wrote: » Boneshatter wrote: » GW2 has housing, it's mostly irrelevant. wait... something is wrong.... you are saying games like GW2 or BDO have housing but the majority of players don't care about it? so you are telling me that even if AoC had no housing system at all, game would still do just fine? I thought AoC was dead on arrival because not everyone can get access to just 1 out of the 3 housing types they have....
SirChancelot wrote: » Liniker wrote: » Boneshatter wrote: » GW2 has housing, it's mostly irrelevant. wait... something is wrong.... you are saying games like GW2 or BDO have housing but the majority of players don't care about it? so you are telling me that even if AoC had no housing system at all, game would still do just fine? I thought AoC was dead on arrival because not everyone can get access to just 1 out of the 3 housing types they have.... Nobody is saying access to the housing or not is a problem. It's locking parts of the game behind it that you can't do unless you have one. FFXIV has housing, you don't have to have one to make gear though... That's what people are pointing at.
Ravicus wrote: » The point is you have to take the freehold from them if they lock you out. Some might be people and allow the max citizens to join and use the freehold as well. But conflict is the game. It is intended that not everyone can get one unless you take one from another. Core design, core mechanic. That is not going to change.
Dygz wrote: » Ravicus wrote: » The point is you have to take the freehold from them if they lock you out. Some might be people and allow the max citizens to join and use the freehold as well. But conflict is the game. It is intended that not everyone can get one unless you take one from another. Core design, core mechanic. That is not going to change. Yeah, but somehow I'm Ok with this for Racial progression and Sieges... But, it doesn't feel right for Freeholds and Crafting. I think because Crafting progression is a core progression path along with Adventurer progression. I think people would not have a problem if you had to have a Freehold to reach max Social Org progression or max Religion progression.
