The freeholds are not for casuals. They are for guilds. Should they be for megaguilds or not?

Enough with the casual farmiville QQ.
Freeholds are an important achievement.

Feeeholds should be family locked. Period. This will prevent 1000 member guilds from giving permission to 1000 people to work on the freehold.
Even the battalion permission idea will cause people to stop and think:

"Do I wanna be a nobody with nothing, amongst 1000 people? Or should I join a guild with 50-80 members and rotate batalion/family membership so that I am permitted to gain access to the 'guilds freeholds' ?" Fvck waiting for 1000 other members.

I think such restrictions will further empower meaningful, smaller communities and weaken the strong advantage that big guilds have, the sheer numbers power.

I think freeholds should allow permission to family members only to help small, strong guilds compete for them, whilst the big guilds enjoy the castles.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

I see you know when you are unwanted.

I know my audience.

Most ppl skip your posts. I skip tjem nearly always.

I didn't know you had talked to "most people". Sorry, "most ppl".

Based on the fact that more than 90% of my posts are replies to people replying to the remaining 10% (or replies to replies), I feel that enough people read them. If any more people started reading them and thus replying, there would be too many replies for me to keep up with.

SirChancelot

George_Black wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

Sathrago wrote: »

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.

Should legendary materials spawn inside the safest areas of nodes? Should the high end recipes for crafting armor and weapons be freely trained at any node trainer? Why does it suddenly matter that processing has restrictions when the other two have clear restrictions as well?

This is more of a personal opinion, but that's one of the things I liked about it. And because it's the middle step, or the more 'passive' style of crafting it was perfect for the people that aren't out there raiding dungeons for those high end mats.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for everyone having equal access to everything... But I feel like there should be something relevant for everyone. I thought freeholds would be perfect for that "end game" loop for those alt MMO players. The players that don't play MMOs for PvP or PvE, but all the other things. I didn't think the freeholds would be just ANOTHER thing that's exclusive to the no lifers.

there are mmos to do all those things. Have you never played one? They are there, go play them, while you wait for ashes. What are you doing?

I quite clearly said that I'm not interested in it...

Look, they have said things like the tavern would be able to give you a buff for a while if you visit them. So I would want there to be a tavern for me to visit before I head off to whatever I want to do... Therefore I want someone to be interested it manning a tavern and working towards the buff it gives being the best around. I don't want to run a tavern, I have no interest... But I want the people who would enjoy running one to be able to do that... so I can benefit from it.

Hence my saying locking it behind being a no-lifer isn't a good idea.

I'll even explain it from your point of view, you want to go be high end raidy'boi... And PvP anyone who gets in your way. Do you want to log in every day, run to your freehold, and manage crops? Or make sure the inventory for your shop is managed? Do you want to play ashes as a farming simulator?

I'm going to assume (dangerous I know...) here that this isn't the gameplay loop you're interested in. So why lock it to where the people who would enjoy that gameplay loop can't get to it?

Ayeveegaming1

I skip all the walls of text from anybody. The best way to win an argument with me is to put me asleep. I remember the old saying with the acroynim KISS: "Keep it simple stupid" -

Ludullu

SirChancelot wrote: »

I'll even explain it from your point of view, you want to go be high end raidy'boi... And PvP anyone who gets in your way. Do you want to log in every day, run to your freehold, and manage crops? Or make sure the inventory for your shop is managed? Do you want to play ashes as a farming simulator?

I'm going to assume (dangerous I know...) here that this isn't the gameplay loop you're interested in. So why lock it to where the people who would enjoy that gameplay loop can't get to it?

I know that you're addressing George, but he's not the only hardcore player here. I'm gonna be nolifing Ashes and I got no interest in top lvl pve or even pvp, until I get to a super rich lvl where I can get whatever I need to buy my way into that content.

And until I do that I'm gonna be working around my node and if I get lucky enough I'll try getting a FH. And I'm sure there's other nolifers who don't care too much about pve/pvp fights. Hell, we literally have Dygz as the biggest example of that. Someone who can play the game for ~8h a day and is not interested in that kind of content (at top difficulty that is). So I'm sure there's at least a few nolifers who're interested in doing crops or running a tavern.

And if I was a GL of a strong guild, I'd find those nolifers and entice them to join my guild, because we'd both benefit from working together.

Liniker

Noaani wrote: »

I come here to try and make this game better.
Lucky you.

lol you are doing a good job wasting your time for 4 years,

AoC isn't a game made by committee they won't change their design pillars no matter how much you spam the same arguments over in every thread, if anything,

they made small changes that went completely against what you consider "better" and what we, the actual target audience enjoy - PvP centric - exclusivity - not made for solo

Fantmx

Solvryn wrote: »

Ravicus wrote: »

Man, more and more hypotheticals and strawment. Never ceases to amaze me.

You’ll learn, discord > forums.

But both are better than reddit.

PherPhur

Boneshatter wrote: »

No casuals=no game. Steven isn't running a charity here, he will eventually run out of money or cut his losses if the game isn't turning a profit. It needs to be sustainable and if casuals are getting pooped on every time they turn around they will find another game and take their money with them.

The majority of gamers are casuals, the vast majority. They're also more often than not the people who have jobs to afford those cosmetic packs.

Casuals however are usually the people complaining about how long things take or the amount of effort. Understandably, they don't have a ton of spare time and they work so they don't want to do more work when they're playing a game.

I wish casuals looked at this game more as a longer journey, as something with monumental achievements that will take them years, and that it's okay because they're just going to join a group and take as long as they need to. But I feel like casuals often look at things through the lens of a sweatlord, always looking at that endgame, the destination and not the journey.

Which is weird, they look at things like some hardcore player, but complain as if Intrepid is taking them(the casual) into account enough. Is that Intrepids problem, shoulddd that be Intrepids problem? As far as I see it, either the game is fun or it's not, and how long it takes me to get something isn't the question.

Maybe instead of focusing on how fast you get something in the game you should ask "am I going to be having fun on my way to get it?".

And people also underestimate some of the smaller guilds, I'll(a hardcore player) be attacking larger zerg guilds like a white blood cell attacking cancer, so you might have unexpected allies. Alliances will form and crumble, nodes will be built and be destroyed, freeholds will open up left and right, guilds will be created and disbanded, some zones will be super important one month and not the other. I'd say it's very unlikely that casuals never get an opportunity to own or co-own a freehold.

Raven016

PherPhur wrote: »

Boneshatter wrote: »

No casuals=no game. Steven isn't running a charity here, he will eventually run out of money or cut his losses if the game isn't turning a profit. It needs to be sustainable and if casuals are getting pooped on every time they turn around they will find another game and take their money with them.

The majority of gamers are casuals, the vast majority. They're also more often than not the people who have jobs to afford those cosmetic packs.

Casuals however are usually the people complaining about how long things take or the amount of effort. Understandably, they don't have a ton of spare time and they work so they don't want to do more work when they're playing a game.

I wish casuals looked at this game more as a longer journey, as something with monumental achievements that will take them years, and that it's okay because they're just going to join a group and take as long as they need to. But I feel like casuals often look at things through the lens of a sweatlord, always looking at that endgame, the destination and not the journey.

...

The casuals who make a habit in playing regularly probably like achievements, even monumental achievements, but not the ones which can be erased one month later and become just a memory.

Noaani

Liniker wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

I come here to try and make this game better.
Lucky you.

lol you are doing a good job wasting your time for 4 years,

May be, but I am also getting more entertainment out of it than I would otherwise get out of the few occasional random minutes I spend here each day. More than worth it to me so far.

Dygz

Liniker wrote: »

they made small changes that went completely against what you consider "better" and what we, the actual target audience enjoy - PvP centric - exclusivity - not made for solo

Again, this is kind of interesting because Steven tells everyone that Ashes is not a PvP-centric game.
He also says that Ashes will have content designed for solo play.

"For those Solo players who don't really care about finding a community to play with but they want to have one when they need it, there's going to be a lot of opportunities from a dialogue perspective, in-game chat options; you can join as part of citizenships: there's a lot of pseudo factions there- social organizations that give you an in to other players without the strong bonds that typically come with guild-oriented organizations; and I think that that's a comfortable medium between the two."
---Steven

"The game is built for both the solo player as well as guild oriented players, both large and small guilds.
Solo players are afterall, still a member of the larger server community."
---Steven

PherPhur

Raven016 wrote: »

The casuals who make a habit in playing regularly probably like achievements, even monumental achievements, but not the ones which can be erased one month later and become just a memory.

That's an entirely different can of worms. You could have it longer than a month, I guess it depends on the types of relationships you make, how much you plan and save up and just a whole bunch of factors. Maybe you form an alliance with a larger guild of sweatlords who come to your aid.

There's also the factor of if you got your freehold after a siege it could be anywhere from 30 to 60 days until it can be sieged again.

Lots going on with this game, but it certainly is possible you lose your freehold in less than a month. Not sure what I can say other than having something that is at risk of getting lost makes it more valuable. I play hardcore in ARPGs and I can say for absolute certain it makes everything you do it the game tremendously better, gear means more, talent points mean more, currency means more, every bit you progress means more.

This is a little different because your loss could be way outside your control, but the effect is still mostly the same I'm sure.
Overall this is just a part of Ashes of Creation and it's what I strongly believe will be what gives it more longevity than any MMO that has ever existed.

These things are baked down into the core foundation of the game too, there's no amount of feedback that is going to keep you from losing a freehold.

Sathrago

Dygz wrote: »

"The game is built for both the solo player as well as guild oriented players, both large and small guilds.
Solo players are afterall, still a member of the larger server community."
---Steven

So when theres a feature that is more exclusive to hard working group players its an affront to solo players and they should just never play the game?

The combat is designed so that there is no balance in 1v1 fights.
The nodes highly encourage interaction and grouping with other citizens to help support and defend them as solo players cannot do so.
The entire processing and crafting side of artisanry requires you to engage with other players to craft and level them.
Even gathering has land management where you need to work with others in your node if you want to keep the land quality high.
Caravans and ships HIGHLY encourage group gameplay.

There's probably more that I can't think of right now, but you should get my point by now. This game probably will allow for a decent solo player experience, assuming you make friends, join a guild, and engage with other players. You're straight up delusional if you think the game will allow a solo player to run around without being a citizen to a node, with no friends, no guild, and somehow perform at the same efficiency and quality as coordinated groups.

Can you play as a solo player? Absolutely, but every system in this game is practically begging you to do it as a group instead. Playing without other players is the anti-thesis to what Steven is creating, and it's a shame that you are still trying so hard to water down these group-based mechanics just so some loner clowns can feel happy about rping by themselves in the corner of their own freehold tavern. That no one would ever go to, because if everyone could plop down a freehold the inns and taverns would be basically worthless.

Liniker

Dygz wrote: »

Again, this is kind of interesting because Steven tells everyone that Ashes is not a PvP-centric game.
He also says that Ashes will have content designed for solo play.

"For those Solo players who don't really care about finding a community to play with but they want to have one when they need it, there's going to be a lot of opportunities from a dialogue perspective, in-game chat options; you can join as part of citizenships: there's a lot of pseudo factions there- social organizations that give you an in to other players without the strong bonds that typically come with guild-oriented organizations; and I think that that's a comfortable medium between the two."
---Steven

"The game is built for both the solo player as well as guild oriented players, both large and small guilds.
Solo players are afterall, still a member of the larger server community."
---Steven

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx6ENXkzhuCDz7-vF_vD34wiYmhNsj1Slu

"MMOs are Not built for Solo Players even tho they have solo things to do"
- Steven Sharif

Liniker

Noaani wrote: »

May be, but I am also getting more entertainment out of it than I would otherwise get out of the few occasional random minutes I spend here each day. More than worth it to me so far.

ahah true, I can't argue against that

Dygz

Liniker wrote: »

"The game is built for both the solo player as well as guild oriented players, both large and small guilds.
Solo players are afterall, still a member of the larger server community."
---Steven

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx6ENXkzhuCDz7-vF_vD34wiYmhNsj1Slu

"MMOs are Not built for Solo Players even tho they have solo things to do"
- Steven Sharif[/quote]
Except "MMOs" is general. While "The game (Ashes)" is specific.

Raven016

Liniker wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

Again, this is kind of interesting because Steven tells everyone that Ashes is not a PvP-centric game.
He also says that Ashes will have content designed for solo play.

"For those Solo players who don't really care about finding a community to play with but they want to have one when they need it, there's going to be a lot of opportunities from a dialogue perspective, in-game chat options; you can join as part of citizenships: there's a lot of pseudo factions there- social organizations that give you an in to other players without the strong bonds that typically come with guild-oriented organizations; and I think that that's a comfortable medium between the two."
---Steven

"The game is built for both the solo player as well as guild oriented players, both large and small guilds.
Solo players are afterall, still a member of the larger server community."
---Steven

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx6ENXkzhuCDz7-vF_vD34wiYmhNsj1Slu

"MMOs are Not built for Solo Players even tho they have solo things to do"
- Steven Sharif

Depends how you define solo. In an mmo can be seen as a collaboration with other players who randomly join to help each-other achieving a common goal. But they break team as soon as the goal was achieved. They never speak to each-other and forget each-other a few minutes later.

Fantmx

The term MMO and the genre was not describing any specific type of gameplay or style.

In its simplest form it is describing a world that is able to have 1000s of simultaneous connections of players that could interact with each other.

Group focused mmos would not be built for solo players, not mmos in general.

https://twitter.com/RichardGarriott/status/1681738698038099971?t=LOa6wlQ_XkNOW0lFk9MtQQ&s=19

Liniker

Dygz wrote: »

Except "MMOs" is general. While "The game (Ashes)" is specific.

Come one Dygz, this was in your own interview.. Steven was replying to your question of why Bill was a good pick for intrepid, I will just quote the whole thing:

Steven:
"(...) there is obviously alignment with Bill on the more kind of old-school approach that I think modern MMOs have deviated from over the course of the last decade or so. There's a lot of alignment and shared thoughts there with Bill that that gave me a great confidence in his role at the studio now.

Dygz:
"Like what? Like what? Name some of those old school ideas."

Steven:
"Yeah, I think I think the idea of putting massive back in massively multiplayer, right. I think the idea of not being delegated and stuck to a railroaded experience that you don't really have a participative aspect in the story that's being told. The social connection, MMOs are not built for solo players, even though they have solo things to do (...) "

These are clearly alignments of Bill and Steven, they both agree that MMOs are not built for solo players - so of course that includes the game they are working on... thats the whole point.

Dygz

And still - that is MMOs, in general.
Whereas he has said of Ashes specifically, "The game is built for both the solo player as well as guild oriented players, both large and small guilds.
Solo players are afterall, still a member of the larger server community."

I think I'll wait for Bill to tell us what he thinks, rather than rely on Steven's interpretation of what Bill thinks.
(Especially since what Steven thinks tends to be inconsistent.)

Raven016

Dygz wrote: »

(Especially since what Steven thinks tends to be inconsistent.)

Steven likes to see many players interested in his game.
Yet he also pours cold water onto their heads.

Child Item