Supporting PvE Raiders in Ashes

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

and Ashes non PvP content from what we have seen is a long way short of that bar (Age of Conan is in my top 5 best top end PvE MMO's).

Which is exactly why we gotta give our feedback to Intrepid to make that pve much better

Like I keep saying, we gotta hold Intrepid to higher standards. It doesn't have to be EQ2 lvls of content release pace, but the quality of what is released should be at that lvl (especially on the open world stuff side).

As you know, I totally agree.

My comments were more directly aimed at an above poster that always claims anyone advocating for better PvE is trying to ruin the games PvP.

Mag7spy

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

and Ashes non PvP content from what we have seen is a long way short of that bar (Age of Conan is in my top 5 best top end PvE MMO's).

Which is exactly why we gotta give our feedback to Intrepid to make that pve much better

Like I keep saying, we gotta hold Intrepid to higher standards. It doesn't have to be EQ2 lvls of content release pace, but the quality of what is released should be at that lvl (especially on the open world stuff side).

Issue with noaani is he wants you to make points based on his logic and rule set in a very particular way, while ignoring valid points.

If we look at archage 2 that is suppose to have more focus on PvE or the riot mmorpg you can make the same argument. We have not seen high level pve so pve players won't play it (which is also not true he is trying to group everyone in hardcore PvE and go by his logic. Game can have mid pve and be fun for casuals and have them all playing it.)

We also makes points like devs don't know things till later on (I'd have to find exact quote but its something akin to that). Which contraindicates his current statements about pve as they are still in the middle of development.

He doesn't take the approach because it is in development they have yet to show or make those things he goes black and white. Trying to suggest those players won't play in order to push his narrative, but the actual truth is if the game is fun people will play.

If we are trying to make arguments based on bad faith its very easy to throw it up on the forums. But devs showing lvl 25-30 characters which is still early game. Should not be expected to be seeing end game raid content any mmorpg you play doing early- mid lvl content is not difficult nor shows any extreme levels of pve content. This applies to all mmorpgs you can use the same logic to say EQ gameplay is terrible and had no challenging pve content. And through up the argument its not worth playing.

All these types of statements can be based of faulty logic. As the game direction of AoC as far as making difficult PvE content can be in the same realm as anything, but what matters to people is their overall gameplay loop and what they have fun in not solely "end game raid content".

So my comment is in rejecting someone trying to suggest the game is almost solely pvp without pve content. And Noaani trying to make a statement agreeing with him in order to push points he wants.

Yet if you are actually following the game you can make huge arguments that pvp is the least of things they have shown and more about creating a good player content loop involving around Pve, exploration and a changing and growing world.

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

*edit
On paper what mmorpg is doing things on a pve level of dynamic events as AoC based on players choice / progression that can have such a reactive PvE effect. (I say on paper because we have seen some things but how the game plays will tell more lastly what we can expect and we won't know till we play. The closest I can think of was rift and that did not feel like that it was jut random mobs spawning in areas every so often. Nothing that would make me feel a true change to pve and exploration.

Mag7spy wrote: »

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

This is why I've been asking them to at least talk about their plans for hardcore pve designs. Do a spreadsheet stream (like they did with nodes) and talk to AI/pve designers about their ideas for hardcore pve.

If Ashes ends up with amazing pve - cool, but so far we've heard a shitton of plans for pvp, but barely any for pve (outside of super vague statements from years ago).

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

This is why I've been asking them to at least talk about their plans for hardcore pve designs. Do a spreadsheet stream (like they did with nodes) and talk to AI/pve designers about their ideas for hardcore pve.

If Ashes ends up with amazing pve - cool, but so far we've heard a shitton of plans for pvp, but barely any for pve (outside of super vague statements from years ago).

You find so? I don't feel like that, I feel like this upcoming stream is approximately the first PvP information we're going to have that would be on the tier of the sort of thing you want to know for PvE.

It's probably me being elitist, but telling me 'there will be sieges and arenas and owPvP' tells me nothing about the quality of that PvP. I don't feel we have the PvP information either, and certainly nothing that would inform anything whatsoever about any PvX.

Forums are gonna explode after this stream... Good luck keeping up with all us 'PvP tryhards' and our 'bad takes' then, Mag, no sarc.

Azherae wrote: »

It's probably me being elitist, but telling me 'there will be sieges and arenas and owPvP' tells me nothing about the quality of that PvP. I don't feel we have the PvP information either, and certainly nothing that would inform anything whatsoever about any PvX.

But what do we know about the pve plans? The only real statement about the hardcore design was from yeaars ago (and a tiiny bit from an interview several months back).

The Tumok fight we got is supposedly the "low lvl content" design, so, in theory, it shouldn't be even counted when thinking about complex pve.

To me pvp quality relies on 2 things. Class design and situations where you can have that pvp. Obviously we got fuckall info on class design, but this relates to the pve side as well, cause it's also influenced by class design.

And we've gotten a shitton of info about pvp situations, and we've even gotten huge updates on that (seas, node ruins). We've seen sieges in A1, we've now seen caravans, we're about to see some other pvp, we've seen Steven getting corruption in the last stream (which relates to the overall owpvp part of the game), we've gotten confirmation that GWs will have always-on pvp - and all of that is just the stuff that I remember off the top of my head rn.

Yes, we can't speak to the innate quality of that pvp, but like I said, I don't want to directly see the complex pve right now. I want them to talk about their plans, just as they've talked about those pvp situations.

Maybe I'm forgetting some details, but have we ever gotten a discussion on what kind of tools pve devs are working with? I wanna hear some dev being super excited for all the possibilities that their tools allow them to explore.

And if all of that is impossible to really talk about until the game has a more stable class design presentation - then we're in for, potentially, years of everyone calling Ashes a pvp game, because all we see/hear about is pvp. Imo this would simply ruin the image of the game (or at least the supposedly desired image).

If we had a pve plans stream, we'd be able to point to that any time some new rando comes here yelling that this will be a shitty pvp game that will be DOA.

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

It's probably me being elitist, but telling me 'there will be sieges and arenas and owPvP' tells me nothing about the quality of that PvP. I don't feel we have the PvP information either, and certainly nothing that would inform anything whatsoever about any PvX.

But what do we know about the pve plans? The only real statement about the hardcore design was from yeaars ago (and a tiiny bit from an interview several months back).

The Tumok fight we got is supposedly the "low lvl content" design, so, in theory, it shouldn't be even counted when thinking about complex pve.

To me pvp quality relies on 2 things. Class design and situations where you can have that pvp. Obviously we got fuckall info on class design, but this relates to the pve side as well, cause it's also influenced by class design.

And we've gotten a shitton of info about pvp situations, and we've even gotten huge updates on that (seas, node ruins). We've seen sieges in A1, we've now seen caravans, we're about to see some other pvp, we've seen Steven getting corruption in the last stream (which relates to the overall owpvp part of the game), we've gotten confirmation that GWs will have always-on pvp - and all of that is just the stuff that I remember off the top of my head rn.

Yes, we can't speak to the innate quality of that pvp, but like I said, I don't want to directly see the complex pve right now. I want them to talk about their plans, just as they've talked about those pvp situations.

Maybe I'm forgetting some details, but have we ever gotten a discussion on what kind of tools pve devs are working with? I wanna hear some dev being super excited for all the possibilities that their tools allow them to explore.

And if all of that is impossible to really talk about until the game has a more stable class design presentation - then we're in for, potentially, years of everyone calling Ashes a pvp game, because all we see/hear about is pvp. Imo this would simply ruin the image of the game (or at least the supposedly desired image).

If we had a pve plans stream, we'd be able to point to that any time some new rando comes here yelling that this will be a shitty pvp game that will be DOA.

The problem with discussing anything like that on these forums is basically that it used to be a lot of 'nuh uh! The game will look like what -I- want!'

We have Alpha-1 PvE and PvX. Open world Dragons, Siege Dragons, It Who x2, etc. My group and I did some other stuff. I've said multiple times 'hey this PvE is actually on a good foundation and I have so far only seen things with good design' (Tumok was actually the first thing I saw that seemed to be going the opposite way, and I'm hoping there was a 'marketing' disconnect between the Devs who did that, and Steven's presentation of it).

So technically, I'm on the other side, I'm just not blustering about it. I believe in Ashes PvE potential but have never seen a concrete indicator that the PvP won't be unbalanced garbage. I've seen a lot of their primary tools from fighting Alpha-1 dragons, etc.

If that is basically what you want, they've got videos already, they're just old and we're 'hoping nothing changed too much'. Copium!

Azherae wrote: »

If that is basically what you want, they've got videos already, they're just old and we're 'hoping nothing changed too much'. Copium!

Yeah, guess we'll have to see.

I just feel like referencing those vids would lead back to the thing you mentioned at the start. People will be saying "well, things change so it's gonna be how I want it". Which is why a new dev stream going over that stuff would be great.

But I doubt that'll happen before A2, so we're shit outta luck.

Vaknar

unknownsystemerror wrote: »

They have been pretty clear over what they intend to deliver. You can advocate and say "I want this. They should do this!" all you like. Won't change what you are going to get. And as mentioned in the quotes below, they are ok if you take your toys and go home.

What we're creating is a PvX game; and what that means is our target audience is the PvX player; and that is our golden cohort. And so to a degree if a player is solely interested in the most elaborate raid boss mechanics within a controlled and curated setting that is instanced gameplay, Ashes might not be the game for them and that's okay. However, with that being said, we do have a division of curated experiences that exist in an 80:20 ratio; and what that means is roughly 20% of the content that players will experience will be instanced, because where we want to have that granular control over the design and mechanics of a particular storyline or encounter we utilize the instance setting to provide that.[1] – Steven Sharif

They won't be best-in-slot type items. You will not accomplish that from in from instanced-based content. Those will be found within the open-world. It'll be a competitive area for you to achieve those things, because other forces will want to achieve them as well; and because it's open-world there will be a limited number of those who can successfully complete on: Whether it be some timer for a world boss, or some condition or other world state predicate. Those are things that people are going to have to contend with each other for.[6] – Steven Sharif

In situations where we want to contain a particular type of raid, we will utilize instancing; and that can protect certain engagements with certain bosses. But that's really more on the 20% of the scenarios will have instancing protection like that. Around 80% of the content is open-world, where competition is- healthy competition is an instigator for soft player friction; for potential cooperation; for the ability to yield alliances; and the political theater that comes with it. So that's an intended part of the PvX design of Ashes. It's a core philosophical point. And just to be clear, that is not for everyone. We are not trying to make a product that appeals to every MMO gamer. That's impossible; and so we've been very upfront and forthright with what we are trying to accomplish and what our core pillars of philosophical design are.[2] – Steven Sharif

There will be some open dungeons that have bosses at the end of the dungeons. There will be some open dungeons that just have a multitude of dungeon bosses, not necessarily world raids or something; and there will be lots of different rooms and they'll be progressive in the sense that in the earlier parts of the dungeon they'll be lower level and then at the later parts of the dungeons deeper down they'll be higher level and more difficult; and that creates again I think an ecosystem of where players across a multitude of levels have an opportunity to coexist within certain areas of the world; and that's good from a social dynamic. It's good from a recruitment dynamic. It's good from just a liveliness and relevance of particular areas. So that you don't end up with these locations that once you pass a certain level like it's empty.[13] – Steven Sharif

In a majority of cases, we do not want to prevent another group from engaging potentially in PvP. We disincentivize it by creating safeguards within the flagging system that make that decision very concerning for the people that might go corrupt; and if you're in the large enough group of numbers I doubt you're going to experience that unless there's some rivalry between guilds. In which case there's apparatuses like Guild Wars that are more opt-in. You can drop guild tag if you want. But anyways, the competitive nature of this environment is a PvX element.[2] – Steven Sharif

Great Steven quotes to share here

Here is a link that features many of these quotes for the uninitiated: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvX

Vaknar

Stalwart wrote: »

Content Suggestion:

- Put the final boss at the end of an open-world dungeon in an instanced arena.
- Look at making 3+ of these boss arenas for release.
- Have the number available to the server based on node setup.
- Fight lengths will be long (10-15+ mins), have multiple stages/waves and possibly separate rooms to change up the arena.
- Content needs to take time to learn and complete. Nothing you can walk into and master in a couple of days.
- Look to current games that are focused on PvE Raiding.
- Only allow one party in the instance at a time. It's not required from a PvP aspect, see paragraph above, I do think it could help eliminate people zerging your fine-tuned mechanics.
- Consider allowing only one instance at a time. This has a lot of implications. Especially around watching the door for PvE and PvP. Just something to consider.
- Consider reduced death penalties in this "event". I'm not positive about this, but I tend to think tough content will require wiping and plenty of it.
- Include achievements like speed, no-death and other fun unique ones.

Reward Suggestion:

- Do not drop exclusive materials, but valuable ones.
- Small chance to drop a unique gear recipe (that can be sold).
- Small chance to drop a low-quality version of that gear.
- Very small chance to drop skins/cosmetic items.
- Miniscule chance to drop a flying mount.
- Performance metrics drive drop rates.
- Completing achievements awards small cosmetics or titles.

It is important to remember that your group will have to fight through an open-world dungeon to get there and to bring the loot home.

Thank you for reading.

The conversation is moving away a bit from what I believe OP was suggesting, which I found to be some interesting thought-starters.

While we can discuss PvX, I do think some idea generation on different or unique ways to blend PvE and PvP with the established systems of Ashes of Creation could be neat c:

Vaknar wrote: »

Stalwart wrote: »

Content Suggestion:

- Put the final boss at the end of an open-world dungeon in an instanced arena.
- Look at making 3+ of these boss arenas for release.
- Have the number available to the server based on node setup.
- Fight lengths will be long (10-15+ mins), have multiple stages/waves and possibly separate rooms to change up the arena.
- Content needs to take time to learn and complete. Nothing you can walk into and master in a couple of days.
- Look to current games that are focused on PvE Raiding.
- Only allow one party in the instance at a time. It's not required from a PvP aspect, see paragraph above, I do think it could help eliminate people zerging your fine-tuned mechanics.
- Consider allowing only one instance at a time. This has a lot of implications. Especially around watching the door for PvE and PvP. Just something to consider.
- Consider reduced death penalties in this "event". I'm not positive about this, but I tend to think tough content will require wiping and plenty of it.
- Include achievements like speed, no-death and other fun unique ones.

Reward Suggestion:

- Do not drop exclusive materials, but valuable ones.
- Small chance to drop a unique gear recipe (that can be sold).
- Small chance to drop a low-quality version of that gear.
- Very small chance to drop skins/cosmetic items.
- Miniscule chance to drop a flying mount.
- Performance metrics drive drop rates.
- Completing achievements awards small cosmetics or titles.

It is important to remember that your group will have to fight through an open-world dungeon to get there and to bring the loot home.

Thank you for reading.

The conversation is moving away a bit from what I believe OP was suggesting, which I found to be some interesting thought-starters.

While we can discuss PvX, I do think some idea generation on different or unique ways to blend PvE and PvP with the established systems of Ashes of Creation could be neat c:

I'm going to be super blunt, @Vaknar

The title of this thread is "Supporting PvE raiders in Ashes". Even if the discussion has moved away from the specific particulars of what the OP had in mind, it is still (mostly) PvE raiders talking about what Ashes needs to do in order to support that playstyle.

Now for the blunt part. As a representative of Intrepid Studios, assuming PvE raiding is a playstyle you (Intrepid Studio) wishes to support, you should be listening and taking notes - not interrupting.

The absolute most you should be doing in this thread - assuming you want a discussion from PvE raiders on what Ashes needs to do to support PvE raiding, is removing posts of people that have no experience or interest in PvE raiding - as such posts simply can not add to a discussion on what Ashes needs to do to support PvE raiding as a playstyle in Ashes.

I'm going to carry on replying to a few other posters in this thread totally ignoring this post of yours. How you wish to moderate from there will say more about Intrepids desire to support PvE raiding than it will anything else.

Azherae wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

This is why I've been asking them to at least talk about their plans for hardcore pve designs. Do a spreadsheet stream (like they did with nodes) and talk to AI/pve designers about their ideas for hardcore pve.

If Ashes ends up with amazing pve - cool, but so far we've heard a shitton of plans for pvp, but barely any for pve (outside of super vague statements from years ago).

You find so? I don't feel like that.

For PvP, we know about sieges.

We know castle sieges will happen once a month for each of five castles on a given server. We know that in the three weeks leading up to a given castles siege, there is a smaller siege on one of the three nodes that make up that castles territory. We know castle sieging has a temporary alliance mechanic associated with it.

We know node sieges will be common enough of a possibility for players to participate in at least one a week if they wish to do so - probably more. We know players in allied nodes cant fight against a node, and players in nodes at war can't be defenders of a node.

We know the population cap will start at 250 per side, and perhaps increase to 500 per. We know small aspects of all sieges will contain small instanced PvP components. We know sieges will only happen during server prime time, giving everyone the highest chance of being able to participate. We know siege weapons will be a major factor for sieges. We know sieges will have multiple objectives players to achieve to have effects such as making respawn harder for the opponent, or easier for allies.

With caravans, we know that they will be a perpetual source of organized PvP. We know that this will be something that is required for the game to function, so such PvP will always happen. We know players can chose which side to join in on when a caravan is under attack - attackers or defenders. We know a caravan is itself made up of individual components that can be attacked and destroyed. We know if you kill the driver of a caravan you can then drive off with said caravan for about 15 minutes before it is destroyed. We even know that you get more loot from a caravan if you pick up sealed crates and transport them rather than destrpying them.

Now, I admit we don't know much about naval PvP, nor node or guild wars. However, we do know some aspects of these other PvP sources.

In terms of PvE, we don't know half of what is above. Sieges have some instanced PvP - presumably this is able to be repeated every siege. Is there any PvE that is similar?

We know there will be the ability for everyone to participate in a siege quite often. Not fight to obtain the right to participate, actually participate. Is there any such comparison in PvE?

We know sieges will have fairly major mechanics specific to them such as siege weapons - will PvE have any major mechanics akin to this, or will it just "borrow" things from PvP?

I mean, we don't even know how many bosses will spawn on a given server. Sure, we have a list of a few PvE encounter names, but that is about as useful as having the names of the castles.

So, I also feel that we know significantly (exponentially) more about PvP in Ashes than we do about PvP. Further, we know a lot more about what we don't yet know about in regards to PvP in Ashes - we know there is a lot more information to come with wars and naval content. We have no idea at all what there is to still be talked about in relation to PvE - because they haven't talked about it enough for us to have any idea at all what they want to do (and what they are able to do).

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

This is why I've been asking them to at least talk about their plans for hardcore pve designs. Do a spreadsheet stream (like they did with nodes) and talk to AI/pve designers about their ideas for hardcore pve.

If Ashes ends up with amazing pve - cool, but so far we've heard a shitton of plans for pvp, but barely any for pve (outside of super vague statements from years ago).

This is the point.

Mag has been arguing for a long time that "the developers don't know, you can't ask them to give details on what they don't know". I have long told him that details of PvE are worthless - I never want details. I want plans. I want to know what Intrepid want to do, and what they feel they are capable of doing.

If all they are able to do is say they want multiple phase fights (arguing as if this is a good thing - it is not), adds, and random skill usage, then my faith and trust in their ability to pull off meaningful PvE content is at rock bottom. This is kind of like saying "yeah, we will have PvP, you'll be able to, like, cast spells and hit each other with melee weapons and stuff", but the developer having nothing else to add to that.

Every single person I play MMO's with regularly knows someone at Intrepid (past or present) in a capacity where they are on a first name basis. We all know the staff is competent at pulling off content. However, we all also know that they can only do that if there is creative desire to do so - which so far there straight up isn't.

I don't know if Steven thinks what he talks about is good PvE or not, all I know is that what little he talks about in regards to PvE is not good PvE.

Depraved

Noaani wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

This is why I've been asking them to at least talk about their plans for hardcore pve designs. Do a spreadsheet stream (like they did with nodes) and talk to AI/pve designers about their ideas for hardcore pve.

If Ashes ends up with amazing pve - cool, but so far we've heard a shitton of plans for pvp, but barely any for pve (outside of super vague statements from years ago).

This is the point.

Mag has been arguing for a long time that "the developers don't know, you can't ask them to give details on what they don't know". I have long told him that details of PvE are worthless - I never want details. I want plans. I want to know what Intrepid want to do, and what they feel they are capable of doing.

If all they are able to do is say they want multiple phase fights (arguing as if this is a good thing - it is not), adds, and random skill usage, then my faith and trust in their ability to pull off meaningful PvE content is at rock bottom. This is kind of like saying "yeah, we will have PvP, you'll be able to, like, cast spells and hit each other with melee weapons and stuff", but the developer having nothing else to add to that.

Every single person I play MMO's with regularly knows someone at Intrepid (past or present) in a capacity where they are on a first name basis. We all know the staff is competent at pulling off content. However, we all also know that they can only do that if there is creative desire to do so - which so far there straight up isn't.

I don't know if Steven thinks what he talks about is good PvE or not, all I know is that what little he talks about in regards to PvE is not good PvE.

what is good pve?

Depraved wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

To make arguments to deny things they have shown based on logic "No end game pve shown" (at lvl 25-30???!) is disingenuous but those are his usual takes.

This is why I've been asking them to at least talk about their plans for hardcore pve designs. Do a spreadsheet stream (like they did with nodes) and talk to AI/pve designers about their ideas for hardcore pve.

If Ashes ends up with amazing pve - cool, but so far we've heard a shitton of plans for pvp, but barely any for pve (outside of super vague statements from years ago).

This is the point.

Mag has been arguing for a long time that "the developers don't know, you can't ask them to give details on what they don't know". I have long told him that details of PvE are worthless - I never want details. I want plans. I want to know what Intrepid want to do, and what they feel they are capable of doing.

If all they are able to do is say they want multiple phase fights (arguing as if this is a good thing - it is not), adds, and random skill usage, then my faith and trust in their ability to pull off meaningful PvE content is at rock bottom. This is kind of like saying "yeah, we will have PvP, you'll be able to, like, cast spells and hit each other with melee weapons and stuff", but the developer having nothing else to add to that.

Every single person I play MMO's with regularly knows someone at Intrepid (past or present) in a capacity where they are on a first name basis. We all know the staff is competent at pulling off content. However, we all also know that they can only do that if there is creative desire to do so - which so far there straight up isn't.

I don't know if Steven thinks what he talks about is good PvE or not, all I know is that what little he talks about in regards to PvE is not good PvE.

what is good pve?

As a question, this encompasses more than you think.

You are perhaps thinking encounters and their design - but this only makes up part of what good PvE is.

Look back to our recent discussion where I outlined two raid encounters that were back to back. They were very different fights, and other fights in that same cycle were even more different.

What made that content cycle good (arguably the best single content cycle of the best PvE MMO ever) is the fact that almost every encounter asked players for something entierly different. There were perhaps only 3 encounters out of more than 20 that you could lose due to lack of DPS, but every encounter was difficult in its own way.

While each encounter needs to be well crafted, that in itself doesn't make for good PvE. Each encounter also needs to be totally different.

This is why phases in PvE is not inherently a good thing. Encounters having phases essentially means the encounter changes in to a mechanically different fight, and so acts as 2, 3, 4 or even 5 different fights in one. The problem is, players don't have the option to respec between phases, meaning the same spec needs to be valid for the whole fight.

A shit tier game may put in an encounter that has a phase that requires pure DPS, a phase that requires high survivability, and a phase that requires a lot of CC. The tuning for this encounter will be very neutral by necessity, and players will be required to take a build that is decent for DPS, has some survivability and either deals or doesn't break CC. Very bland.

A good game will take those three phases, split them out in to three encounters and require players taking on the DPS aspect to run with the actual best DPS spec (both for individual players and for the raid as a whole) that the game offers in order to have any chance at killing the encounter. Then players taking on the survivability aspect will need to spec in the highest survivability build available, likely seeing the entire raid having either cleric or tank as their secondary. Then the last will see the raid needing to pull out a comparitively large number of CC specalists, and make sure everyone elses build is not going to break said CC.

Because each of these individual encounters can be tuned under the assumption that the raid is spec'd specifically for what the encounter asks, the encounter can ask for much more of that thing than any encounter with phases can ever ask for. Thus, the individual encounters will always feel more unique.

However, if those three encounters above existed in isolation in an MMORPG, it would still be shit PvE. Good PvE needs progression (basically a natural step up from running group content, with a steady incline up to the hardest encounters in the game), and needs access to content (if I need to PvP a PvP focused guild in order to PvE, the game has PvP with rewards, not PvE - if PvP needs to be a factor, give me the content, let me beat it, then make me PvP after the fact). Then there is also a volume of content, but this ties in to progression. If a game has 6 raid encounters, that is a very short progression and would mean either the progression isn't that nice steady incline, or it would mean the hardest encounter isn't much more than the easiest (6 encounters would equal a single content tier in most games - a progression cycle would be 4 or 5 tiers).

I don't really think Intrepid will cater to PvE raiding players. However, I will continue to point out what they need to do in order to cater to us, and continue to point out they have the staff on hand to make it so - specifically so that everyone knows the only reason they don't cater is due to some "creative" decision.

Vaknar

Noaani wrote: »

Vaknar wrote: »

Stalwart wrote: »

Content Suggestion:

- Put the final boss at the end of an open-world dungeon in an instanced arena.
- Look at making 3+ of these boss arenas for release.
- Have the number available to the server based on node setup.
- Fight lengths will be long (10-15+ mins), have multiple stages/waves and possibly separate rooms to change up the arena.
- Content needs to take time to learn and complete. Nothing you can walk into and master in a couple of days.
- Look to current games that are focused on PvE Raiding.
- Only allow one party in the instance at a time. It's not required from a PvP aspect, see paragraph above, I do think it could help eliminate people zerging your fine-tuned mechanics.
- Consider allowing only one instance at a time. This has a lot of implications. Especially around watching the door for PvE and PvP. Just something to consider.
- Consider reduced death penalties in this "event". I'm not positive about this, but I tend to think tough content will require wiping and plenty of it.
- Include achievements like speed, no-death and other fun unique ones.

Reward Suggestion:

- Do not drop exclusive materials, but valuable ones.
- Small chance to drop a unique gear recipe (that can be sold).
- Small chance to drop a low-quality version of that gear.
- Very small chance to drop skins/cosmetic items.
- Miniscule chance to drop a flying mount.
- Performance metrics drive drop rates.
- Completing achievements awards small cosmetics or titles.

It is important to remember that your group will have to fight through an open-world dungeon to get there and to bring the loot home.

Thank you for reading.

The conversation is moving away a bit from what I believe OP was suggesting, which I found to be some interesting thought-starters.

While we can discuss PvX, I do think some idea generation on different or unique ways to blend PvE and PvP with the established systems of Ashes of Creation could be neat c:

I'm going to be super blunt, @Vaknar

The title of this thread is "Supporting PvE raiders in Ashes". Even if the discussion has moved away from the specific particulars of what the OP had in mind, it is still (mostly) PvE raiders talking about what Ashes needs to do in order to support that playstyle.

Now for the blunt part. As a representative of Intrepid Studios, assuming PvE raiding is a playstyle you (Intrepid Studio) wishes to support, you should be listening and taking notes - not interrupting.

The absolute most you should be doing in this thread - assuming you want a discussion from PvE raiders on what Ashes needs to do to support PvE raiding, is removing posts of people that have no experience or interest in PvE raiding - as such posts simply can not add to a discussion on what Ashes needs to do to support PvE raiding as a playstyle in Ashes.

I'm going to carry on replying to a few other posters in this thread totally ignoring this post of yours. How you wish to moderate from there will say more about Intrepids desire to support PvE raiding than it will anything else.

Hi Noaani!

I can see how my post could be misinterpreted. No worries! Let me reiterate for clarification

Like I had said, we can continue to freely discuss PvX, or PvE raiding in this thread

there are interesting conversations here.

I'm offering a touch-point back to OP's intentions for newcomers to the thread. This can be a jumping-off point for some to join the conversation, which can help this thread's traction and introduce new ideas and opinions to the topic

This does not interrupt how feedback can be collected from conversations happening here.

I do not wish to argue with you, so I will leave it at that. Feel free to carry on

As a reminder, Ashes of Creation is a PvX game. Players will naturally encounter both PvP and PvE elements. It is unlikely that a player could purely focus on just PvP or just PvE. You can read more about PvX here, on the wiki: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvX

You can also read about Raids here, on the wiki: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Raids

Vaknar wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Vaknar wrote: »

Stalwart wrote: »

Content Suggestion:

- Put the final boss at the end of an open-world dungeon in an instanced arena.
- Look at making 3+ of these boss arenas for release.
- Have the number available to the server based on node setup.
- Fight lengths will be long (10-15+ mins), have multiple stages/waves and possibly separate rooms to change up the arena.
- Content needs to take time to learn and complete. Nothing you can walk into and master in a couple of days.
- Look to current games that are focused on PvE Raiding.
- Only allow one party in the instance at a time. It's not required from a PvP aspect, see paragraph above, I do think it could help eliminate people zerging your fine-tuned mechanics.
- Consider allowing only one instance at a time. This has a lot of implications. Especially around watching the door for PvE and PvP. Just something to consider.
- Consider reduced death penalties in this "event". I'm not positive about this, but I tend to think tough content will require wiping and plenty of it.
- Include achievements like speed, no-death and other fun unique ones.

Reward Suggestion:

- Do not drop exclusive materials, but valuable ones.
- Small chance to drop a unique gear recipe (that can be sold).
- Small chance to drop a low-quality version of that gear.
- Very small chance to drop skins/cosmetic items.
- Miniscule chance to drop a flying mount.
- Performance metrics drive drop rates.
- Completing achievements awards small cosmetics or titles.

It is important to remember that your group will have to fight through an open-world dungeon to get there and to bring the loot home.

Thank you for reading.

The conversation is moving away a bit from what I believe OP was suggesting, which I found to be some interesting thought-starters.

While we can discuss PvX, I do think some idea generation on different or unique ways to blend PvE and PvP with the established systems of Ashes of Creation could be neat c:

I'm going to be super blunt, Vaknar

The title of this thread is "Supporting PvE raiders in Ashes". Even if the discussion has moved away from the specific particulars of what the OP had in mind, it is still (mostly) PvE raiders talking about what Ashes needs to do in order to support that playstyle.

Now for the blunt part. As a representative of Intrepid Studios, assuming PvE raiding is a playstyle you (Intrepid Studio) wishes to support, you should be listening and taking notes - not interrupting.

The absolute most you should be doing in this thread - assuming you want a discussion from PvE raiders on what Ashes needs to do to support PvE raiding, is removing posts of people that have no experience or interest in PvE raiding - as such posts simply can not add to a discussion on what Ashes needs to do to support PvE raiding as a playstyle in Ashes.

I'm going to carry on replying to a few other posters in this thread totally ignoring this post of yours. How you wish to moderate from there will say more about Intrepids desire to support PvE raiding than it will anything else.

Hi Noaani!

I can see how my post could be misinterpreted. No worries! Let me reiterate for clarification

Clarification is always good, and your previous post is now more clear.

Thanks.

As a reminder, Ashes of Creation is a PvX game. Players will naturally encounter both PvP and PvE elements. It is unlikely that a player could purely focus on just PvP or just PvE. You can read more about PvX here, on the wiki: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/PvX

You can also read about Raids here, on the wiki: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Raids

To add to this (mostly for anyone new to the thread, but potentially also for you if you were not aware);

Those of us that have been around these forums for a long while have long since talked about the fact that there are some players that only want PvE content and no PvP at all, and also some players that only want PvP content with no PvE at all. This game will not suit either of these players, and so the assumption is that they will simply not play Ashes.

As such, when those same few of us that have been here a while talk about PvE players, we are talking about players that prefer PvE over PvP, but fully accept PvP, and even enjoy it in the right circumstances. Same with when we talk about PvP players, we have discounted players that only want PvP and nothing else, and so refer to those that prefer PvP over PvE as being PvP players.

It's just easier to write that out than explaining it over and over.

As to the game being a PvX game rather than a PvE or PvP game, I want to point out that Ashes will have repeatable PvP content that is completely divorced from PvE in the form of arenas and sieges. It seems only fitting that it also have repearable PvE content in the form of instanced raids to balance this out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U36rvEZkoIg

NiKr wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

If that is basically what you want, they've got videos already, they're just old and we're 'hoping nothing changed too much'. Copium!

Yeah, guess we'll have to see.

I just feel like referencing those vids would lead back to the thing you mentioned at the start. People will be saying "well, things change so it's gonna be how I want it". Which is why a new dev stream going over that stuff would be great.

But I doubt that'll happen before A2, so we're shit outta luck.

I suppose it couldn't hurt, but in the end, they don't plan to make 'hyper complex PvE', because that isn't very compatible with PvX. What they can do, what they've built towards doing as far as I've seen, is to make 'complex PvX'.

This is a thing that can be done, if that's the audience you're going for. And for now, Ashes would be among the only games with any intention to do this (since, if you were putting in the effort to make complex PvX, you'd have the tools to pivot to making decently complex PvE and pleasing a larger slice of the market share).

Even TL is on the fence, it has a lot of bosses that could be 'shifted to be complex PvX', but are just dungeon bosses, and yet their 'raids' tend to be either 'Woo PvE zerg' or 'Ok let's PvP around this pinata for 20m'. Even the dungeon bosses, they're clearly being conservative in just how hard those are, because it's not time for 'difficult' yet. They're appealing to 'just slightly better than the average'. (See below)

But when you say 'tools', the problem is that even if you wanted to limit yourself to 'complex PvX', there still isn't really much of a way to discuss 'tools', any more than you can do it for Elden Ring, Monster Hunter, etc. Those PvE experiences aren't based on 'design tools', the whole point is that they're so unique that your entire goal structure can change from target to target, and then it comes down to 'what aspects of your regular gameplay the devs wish to maintain within the fight'. Most people won't understand the design space if someone attempts to explain the 'tools and approaches' used to make and tune even the simpler boss in the video.

Any such stream would just come off as rambling, potentially empty promises, to many people, and for others, those videos exist already. What needs to be shown has already been shown (relative to Steven's PvX commitment). There's no real need to even discuss 'PvE raiding' in the simple sense. There is only 'PvX raiding' and the stuff they can do to make that 'not stupid'.

PvX gamers are few, as I perceive it, and hard to please. Average PvE gamers and average PvP gamers are much easier to appease through explanations and simple stopgaps like 'close the Boss door' and 'flag everyone for PvP'.

So I take back the first thing I said: If Intrepid went into detail about their PvX encounter design philosophy, it'd probably do more harm than good.

Azherae wrote: »

I suppose it couldn't hurt, but in the end, they don't plan to make 'hyper complex PvE', because that isn't very compatible with PvX.

It is no less compatible with PvX than a PvP arena is.

It is just (arguably) not their specific vision for PvX.

Azherae wrote: »

PvX gamers are few, as I perceive it, and hard to please. Average PvE gamers and average PvP gamers are much easier to appease through explanations and simple stopgaps like 'close the Boss door' and 'flag everyone for PvP'.

So I take back the first thing I said: If Intrepid went into detail about their PvX encounter design philosophy, it'd probably do more harm than good.

Yeah, I guess you're right. My idealistic PvX boss design would most likely not appeal to either side of the pvx player scale.

If that TL boss is an "instanced" one then daaamn I sure hope AoC's instanced stuff is harder. Hell, I hope ow stuff is harder

That party barely even lost hp throughout the fight, and that's a lvl 50 fucking boss!