Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is. now you are changing the argument. you are talking about time now. ok lets do it. what if my guild camps a rare herb for a month and your guild cant beat us in pvp? you can always come back after a month and get the herb, sure, but I can say the same thing about freehold. you can always come back later and siege the node then take the fh then process, the difference is the time of the day and scale of the battle.
Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is.
Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot
Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is. now you are changing the argument. you are talking about time now. ok lets do it. what if my guild camps a rare herb for a month and your guild cant beat us in pvp? you can always come back after a month and get the herb, sure, but I can say the same thing about freehold. you can always come back later and siege the node then take the fh then process, the difference is the time of the day and scale of the battle. No, pay attention to the discussion please. That post wasn't me changing the argument, it was me refuting someone that was trying to misrepresent the argument. To your point about that rare herb - that rare herb isn't going to be the only means to level up herbalism. Sure, you may well lock me out of being able to make some specific rare thing - but you aren't preventing me from progressing. As such, the thing you are talking about is perfectly fine, acceptable and a part of the game. Go out and block people from rare herbs my dude.
Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is. now you are changing the argument. you are talking about time now. ok lets do it. what if my guild camps a rare herb for a month and your guild cant beat us in pvp? you can always come back after a month and get the herb, sure, but I can say the same thing about freehold. you can always come back later and siege the node then take the fh then process, the difference is the time of the day and scale of the battle. No, pay attention to the discussion please. That post wasn't me changing the argument, it was me refuting someone that was trying to misrepresent the argument. To your point about that rare herb - that rare herb isn't going to be the only means to level up herbalism. Sure, you may well lock me out of being able to make some specific rare thing - but you aren't preventing me from progressing. As such, the thing you are talking about is perfectly fine, acceptable and a part of the game. Go out and block people from rare herbs my dude. but the point of progressing is to do something with that progression, or to you Is it just to fill a bar or check a box?
ExiledByrd wrote: » Has anyone seen any reason why they wouldn't be disadvantaged by going slow?
Noaani wrote: » ShroudedFox wrote: » I don’t particularly see an issue with the current design, part of the design ideas that I have seen from intrepid is exclusivity, and large achievement should require group effort, your complaining that the top 5% of processing/crafting shouldn’t be gatekeeped by other people but realistically only the top 5% of guilds will even have access to those mats from world bosses a solo player was never going to get access to those mats in the first place. This is just poor design - if it is indeed the intention. Exclusivity is fine, but not for levelig. There is a reason most games keep leveling distinct from any content designed to add exclusivity to a game. There is a reason you don't need to raid to level up in WoW, for example.
ShroudedFox wrote: » I don’t particularly see an issue with the current design, part of the design ideas that I have seen from intrepid is exclusivity, and large achievement should require group effort, your complaining that the top 5% of processing/crafting shouldn’t be gatekeeped by other people but realistically only the top 5% of guilds will even have access to those mats from world bosses a solo player was never going to get access to those mats in the first place.
Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is. now you are changing the argument. you are talking about time now. ok lets do it. what if my guild camps a rare herb for a month and your guild cant beat us in pvp? you can always come back after a month and get the herb, sure, but I can say the same thing about freehold. you can always come back later and siege the node then take the fh then process, the difference is the time of the day and scale of the battle. No, pay attention to the discussion please. That post wasn't me changing the argument, it was me refuting someone that was trying to misrepresent the argument. To your point about that rare herb - that rare herb isn't going to be the only means to level up herbalism. Sure, you may well lock me out of being able to make some specific rare thing - but you aren't preventing me from progressing. As such, the thing you are talking about is perfectly fine, acceptable and a part of the game. Go out and block people from rare herbs my dude. but the point of progressing is to do something with that progression, or to you Is it just to fill a bar or check a box? It is, but the progression comes first, then you go about doing something with it. Progression in a path like this should never have this kind of block, but this kind of block is perfectly acceptable once you are trying to do something with that progression. Same as leveling up as an adventurer. There should be no specific block to it. You shouldn't need my permission to level up past 30. However, when you get to the level cap, if you want to raid (something you are doing with your progression to the level cap), it is perfectly reasonable that you need an invitation to a raid in order to do that. If it turns out that you need to gather level 30 materials to make level 30 processed components in order to make level 50 gear that you can then make better by getting level 50 materials to make level 50 processed materials to make that level 50 gear you made with level 30 gathered materials made in to level 30 processed components, then the base issue of the block to progression still exists - we just now have the additional issue of a completely fucked up crafting system. Taking one stupid thing and putting it inside a second stupid thing just means you have two stupid things, not no stupid things.
Laetitian wrote: » To kickstart the response, my assumption is 60-80% of crafters...
Depraved wrote: » i could even get the crafted item or craft the item without a fh. i can skip the progression and get the result right away. games do things like that. complaining about only one of the many things that are this way is just arbitrary
Lodrig wrote: » For the 10th Bloody time we have NO EVIDENCE that you need a tier 5 Processing stations located on a Freehold to advance a processing artisan skill to Grand Master.
ShivaFang wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » For the 10th Bloody time we have NO EVIDENCE that you need a tier 5 Processing stations located on a Freehold to advance a processing artisan skill to Grand Master. You will likely need a Master station to progress to grandmaster. Master processing stations only exist on freeholds. Node processing stations only go to Journeyman.
Depraved wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line. That character cap makes it wastefull to get a skill level above the station/materials you have access too, but it donsn't make it impossible. And what would be the point if they did? I could foresee possible mechanical advantages, like faster crafting of items below your max skill level, maybe more efficient use of materials etc. If such advantages exist then their will almost certainly be the ability to skill up above the station level. Refer back to my same comment. There should not be any case in which progress is limited just because you can't get 'permission' from another player. see it always goes back to that. that's the root of the argument and you can apply that to everything. its also silly to try to remove that on a game with open world PVP and scarcity. if I'm farming an open world dungeon and you need to farm it, I'm there, I'm going to kill you and take the mobs. if you wanna farm you need to ask for permission (or use force). its the same thing. caravan runs? same thing. castle siege, same thing. freeholds? ask for permission or use force and take the node and the fh. this is ashes. what a player thinks should or shouldn't happen might or might not be a good fit for a specific game. just because something is one way in one game, doesn't mean it must or should be like that in a different game.
Caeryl wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line. That character cap makes it wastefull to get a skill level above the station/materials you have access too, but it donsn't make it impossible. And what would be the point if they did? I could foresee possible mechanical advantages, like faster crafting of items below your max skill level, maybe more efficient use of materials etc. If such advantages exist then their will almost certainly be the ability to skill up above the station level. Refer back to my same comment. There should not be any case in which progress is limited just because you can't get 'permission' from another player.
Lodrig wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line. That character cap makes it wastefull to get a skill level above the station/materials you have access too, but it donsn't make it impossible. And what would be the point if they did? I could foresee possible mechanical advantages, like faster crafting of items below your max skill level, maybe more efficient use of materials etc. If such advantages exist then their will almost certainly be the ability to skill up above the station level.
Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line.
Caeryl wrote: » The issue is very, very simple: Players should never be denied progress based on someone ticking a box in the UI. Players can't turn off people's ability to attack them to gain resources off them. Players can't turn off dungeon doors to keep other groups from entering them to fight for it. Players can't turn off their caravan's PvP area to keep people from attacking it. Players can't turn off others' ability to harvest in an area. But for Processing only, players can just turn off your ability to compete for use of a forge. Players can get the highest value items without contesting. Players can deny your ability progress using nothing but the game UI, rather than their groups coordination, their individual skill, or through taking risk.
Caeryl wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line. That character cap makes it wastefull to get a skill level above the station/materials you have access too, but it donsn't make it impossible. And what would be the point if they did? I could foresee possible mechanical advantages, like faster crafting of items below your max skill level, maybe more efficient use of materials etc. If such advantages exist then their will almost certainly be the ability to skill up above the station level. Refer back to my same comment. There should not be any case in which progress is limited just because you can't get 'permission' from another player. see it always goes back to that. that's the root of the argument and you can apply that to everything. its also silly to try to remove that on a game with open world PVP and scarcity. if I'm farming an open world dungeon and you need to farm it, I'm there, I'm going to kill you and take the mobs. if you wanna farm you need to ask for permission (or use force). its the same thing. caravan runs? same thing. castle siege, same thing. freeholds? ask for permission or use force and take the node and the fh. this is ashes. what a player thinks should or shouldn't happen might or might not be a good fit for a specific game. just because something is one way in one game, doesn't mean it must or should be like that in a different game. Caeryl wrote: » The issue is very, very simple: Players should never be denied progress based on someone ticking a box in the UI. Players can't turn off people's ability to attack them to gain resources off them. Players can't turn off dungeon doors to keep other groups from entering them to fight for it. Players can't turn off their caravan's PvP area to keep people from attacking it. Players can't turn off others' ability to harvest in an area. [...] Every single system you listed would be completely unacceptable if it functioned like Processing, in which players could stop you from interacting with those systems at whim with absolutely nothing for you to do to about it.
Caeryl wrote: » The issue is very, very simple: Players should never be denied progress based on someone ticking a box in the UI. Players can't turn off people's ability to attack them to gain resources off them. Players can't turn off dungeon doors to keep other groups from entering them to fight for it. Players can't turn off their caravan's PvP area to keep people from attacking it. Players can't turn off others' ability to harvest in an area. [...]
Laetitian wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line. That character cap makes it wastefull to get a skill level above the station/materials you have access too, but it donsn't make it impossible. And what would be the point if they did? I could foresee possible mechanical advantages, like faster crafting of items below your max skill level, maybe more efficient use of materials etc. If such advantages exist then their will almost certainly be the ability to skill up above the station level. Refer back to my same comment. There should not be any case in which progress is limited just because you can't get 'permission' from another player. see it always goes back to that. that's the root of the argument and you can apply that to everything. its also silly to try to remove that on a game with open world PVP and scarcity. if I'm farming an open world dungeon and you need to farm it, I'm there, I'm going to kill you and take the mobs. if you wanna farm you need to ask for permission (or use force). its the same thing. caravan runs? same thing. castle siege, same thing. freeholds? ask for permission or use force and take the node and the fh. this is ashes. what a player thinks should or shouldn't happen might or might not be a good fit for a specific game. just because something is one way in one game, doesn't mean it must or should be like that in a different game. Caeryl wrote: » The issue is very, very simple: Players should never be denied progress based on someone ticking a box in the UI. Players can't turn off people's ability to attack them to gain resources off them. Players can't turn off dungeon doors to keep other groups from entering them to fight for it. Players can't turn off their caravan's PvP area to keep people from attacking it. Players can't turn off others' ability to harvest in an area. [...] Every single system you listed would be completely unacceptable if it functioned like Processing, in which players could stop you from interacting with those systems at whim with absolutely nothing for you to do to about it. Are you really this convinced that if there was a system that made the participation in some dungeons, or caravans restricted to a group of top competing players on a server, the people arguing against you here would change their stance?
Laetitian wrote: » Noaani wrote: » ShroudedFox wrote: » I don’t particularly see an issue with the current design, part of the design ideas that I have seen from intrepid is exclusivity, and large achievement should require group effort, your complaining that the top 5% of processing/crafting shouldn’t be gatekeeped by other people but realistically only the top 5% of guilds will even have access to those mats from world bosses a solo player was never going to get access to those mats in the first place. This is just poor design - if it is indeed the intention. Exclusivity is fine, but not for levelig. There is a reason most games keep leveling distinct from any content designed to add exclusivity to a game. There is a reason you don't need to raid to level up in WoW, for example. Roughly what percentage of dedicated (meaning they care enough about it to continue for 9 months to make an effort to get Freehold access, and make the skill tree work) aspiring crafters processors do you think will manage to have sufficient access to a Freehold to attain the ability to produce competitive level 50 processed goods (in the system as currently outlined, without hotfixes to clean up the levelling balancing mess you foresee)? Let's say within the first 9 months after launch, of active players who started shortly after launch? Just so we're on the same page about what expected outcome exactly you're calling "poor design." To kickstart the response, my assumption is 60-80% of crafters processors who care enough to keep trying and actively play the game will get sufficient Freehold access for this purpose one way or another, and become proficient crafters processors within 9 months. Because there are only so many players competing for the available Freeholds on a server, a substantial portion of the access will be gained through sharing, and crafters processors will be among the more driven subset of the Freehold competition. And that sounds like perfectly great game design to me. Where competition matters, and progression requires effort and offers a challenge. And the remaining 20-40% can either shift their priorities, or keep saving up the money they're not spending on Freeholds, and catch up later. Or both, really.
Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is. now you are changing the argument. you are talking about time now. ok lets do it. what if my guild camps a rare herb for a month and your guild cant beat us in pvp? you can always come back after a month and get the herb, sure, but I can say the same thing about freehold. you can always come back later and siege the node then take the fh then process, the difference is the time of the day and scale of the battle. No, pay attention to the discussion please. That post wasn't me changing the argument, it was me refuting someone that was trying to misrepresent the argument. To your point about that rare herb - that rare herb isn't going to be the only means to level up herbalism. Sure, you may well lock me out of being able to make some specific rare thing - but you aren't preventing me from progressing. As such, the thing you are talking about is perfectly fine, acceptable and a part of the game. Go out and block people from rare herbs my dude. but the point of progressing is to do something with that progression, or to you Is it just to fill a bar or check a box? It is, but the progression comes first, then you go about doing something with it. Progression in a path like this should never have this kind of block, but this kind of block is perfectly acceptable once you are trying to do something with that progression. Same as leveling up as an adventurer. There should be no specific block to it. You shouldn't need my permission to level up past 30. However, when you get to the level cap, if you want to raid (something you are doing with your progression to the level cap), it is perfectly reasonable that you need an invitation to a raid in order to do that. If it turns out that you need to gather level 30 materials to make level 30 processed components in order to make level 50 gear that you can then make better by getting level 50 materials to make level 50 processed materials to make that level 50 gear you made with level 30 gathered materials made in to level 30 processed components, then the base issue of the block to progression still exists - we just now have the additional issue of a completely fucked up crafting system. Taking one stupid thing and putting it inside a second stupid thing just means you have two stupid things, not no stupid things. we need progression to get something out of it or do something with it; but you can get that thing without the progression. i could be a level 10 player (or even 30 without the min gear) and you can still invite me to the raid just to carry me. i can still get the materials produced at a fh without owning one or receiving a player's permission. i could even get the crafted item or craft the item without a fh. i can skip the progression and get the result right away. games do things like that. complaining about only one of the many things that are this way is just arbitrary
ShivaFang wrote: » ExiledByrd wrote: » Has anyone seen any reason why they wouldn't be disadvantaged by going slow? Not all freeholds are unlocked at the start of the game. They come onlilne as nodes level up. The 10% of sweaty players that get to 50 first won't be able to monopolize all the freeholds right off the bat. As other towns, cities and metros come online more freeholds become available for those that hit 50 a little later.
Caeryl wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We are talking about Skill Lines. We aren't talking about the mats. Processing shouldn't be treated differently than quite literally every other skill line in the game. Imagine if you couldn't hit level50 without getting some waiver from a player, or you couldn't unlock a skill from your social org without getting a waiver from a player, or you couldn't fish in a particular zone with a waiver from a player. Skill line progression should never be reliant on getting a permission slip signed. And again, freeholds are as safe a space as you can possibly get. There is no risk to processing in them for a guild, cuz it's going straight to their base or their castle or to the player's personal storage or to a crafter to make gear that can't drop. It's no more risky for them than the Processor who was denied entry to use their forge to finish the leveling process for their artisan line. That character cap makes it wastefull to get a skill level above the station/materials you have access too, but it donsn't make it impossible. And what would be the point if they did? I could foresee possible mechanical advantages, like faster crafting of items below your max skill level, maybe more efficient use of materials etc. If such advantages exist then their will almost certainly be the ability to skill up above the station level. Refer back to my same comment. There should not be any case in which progress is limited just because you can't get 'permission' from another player. see it always goes back to that. that's the root of the argument and you can apply that to everything. its also silly to try to remove that on a game with open world PVP and scarcity. if I'm farming an open world dungeon and you need to farm it, I'm there, I'm going to kill you and take the mobs. if you wanna farm you need to ask for permission (or use force). its the same thing. caravan runs? same thing. castle siege, same thing. freeholds? ask for permission or use force and take the node and the fh. this is ashes. what a player thinks should or shouldn't happen might or might not be a good fit for a specific game. just because something is one way in one game, doesn't mean it must or should be like that in a different game. You are once again either by choice or lack of reading comprehension not understanding to my argument. You've been making one up out of nowhere like Lodrig has, but still refuse to address the actual argument made against arbitrary gatekeeping of a core artisan system. Caeryl wrote: » The issue is very, very simple: Players should never be denied progress based on someone ticking a box in the UI. Players can't turn off people's ability to attack them to gain resources off them. Players can't turn off dungeon doors to keep other groups from entering them to fight for it. Players can't turn off their caravan's PvP area to keep people from attacking it. Players can't turn off others' ability to harvest in an area. But for Processing only, players can just turn off your ability to compete for use of a forge. Players can get the highest value items without contesting. Players can deny your ability progress using nothing but the game UI, rather than their groups coordination, their individual skill, or through taking risk. Every single system you listed would be completely unacceptable if it functioned like Processing, in which players could stop you from interacting with those systems at whim with absolutely nothing for you to do to about it.
Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Depraved wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Lodrig wrote: » No matter how much you two cry your not going to convince me with your pathetic arguments and strawmans. Getting a FreeHold is explicitly a contest with other players no different from controling a gathering spot That isn't the argument though. You say we are using strawman arguments, but you are the one arguing points we are not making. Sure, someone can prevent you from farming an area, but there are other areas where you can progress, or you can just come back later on when thst person has moved on. If you don't have that freehold though, you are locked out. There are no other areas, and you can't just come back later. It is very much you arguing against points we are not making - which is what a strawman argument is. now you are changing the argument. you are talking about time now. ok lets do it. what if my guild camps a rare herb for a month and your guild cant beat us in pvp? you can always come back after a month and get the herb, sure, but I can say the same thing about freehold. you can always come back later and siege the node then take the fh then process, the difference is the time of the day and scale of the battle. No, pay attention to the discussion please. That post wasn't me changing the argument, it was me refuting someone that was trying to misrepresent the argument. To your point about that rare herb - that rare herb isn't going to be the only means to level up herbalism. Sure, you may well lock me out of being able to make some specific rare thing - but you aren't preventing me from progressing. As such, the thing you are talking about is perfectly fine, acceptable and a part of the game. Go out and block people from rare herbs my dude. but the point of progressing is to do something with that progression, or to you Is it just to fill a bar or check a box? It is, but the progression comes first, then you go about doing something with it. Progression in a path like this should never have this kind of block, but this kind of block is perfectly acceptable once you are trying to do something with that progression. Same as leveling up as an adventurer. There should be no specific block to it. You shouldn't need my permission to level up past 30. However, when you get to the level cap, if you want to raid (something you are doing with your progression to the level cap), it is perfectly reasonable that you need an invitation to a raid in order to do that. If it turns out that you need to gather level 30 materials to make level 30 processed components in order to make level 50 gear that you can then make better by getting level 50 materials to make level 50 processed materials to make that level 50 gear you made with level 30 gathered materials made in to level 30 processed components, then the base issue of the block to progression still exists - we just now have the additional issue of a completely fucked up crafting system. Taking one stupid thing and putting it inside a second stupid thing just means you have two stupid things, not no stupid things. we need progression to get something out of it or do something with it; but you can get that thing without the progression. i could be a level 10 player (or even 30 without the min gear) and you can still invite me to the raid just to carry me. i can still get the materials produced at a fh without owning one or receiving a player's permission. i could even get the crafted item or craft the item without a fh. i can skip the progression and get the result right away. games do things like that. complaining about only one of the many things that are this way is just arbitrary This is a pretty weak argument. No, you aren't being carried as a level 10 on a raid. If the games combat system is worth being called a combat system, you won't survive the first trash mob - even if you remain well out of range. You can be invited, but without that progression you aren't participating, and again if the game is not shit, you aren't getting any benefit from being there, only penalties. If a game were so badly designed that a level 10 could be invited along on a raid and get any of the rewards, I'd be as vocal complaining about how shit a game thst is as I am here. Arguing that something else could be shit design really isn't a good argument.
Noaani wrote: » Laetitian wrote: » Noaani wrote: » ShroudedFox wrote: » I don’t particularly see an issue with the current design, part of the design ideas that I have seen from intrepid is exclusivity, and large achievement should require group effort, your complaining that the top 5% of processing/crafting shouldn’t be gatekeeped by other people but realistically only the top 5% of guilds will even have access to those mats from world bosses a solo player was never going to get access to those mats in the first place. This is just poor design - if it is indeed the intention. Exclusivity is fine, but not for levelig. There is a reason most games keep leveling distinct from any content designed to add exclusivity to a game. There is a reason you don't need to raid to level up in WoW, for example. Roughly what percentage of dedicated (meaning they care enough about it to continue for 9 months to make an effort to get Freehold access, and make the skill tree work) aspiring crafters processors do you think will manage to have sufficient access to a Freehold to attain the ability to produce competitive level 50 processed goods (in the system as currently outlined, without hotfixes to clean up the levelling balancing mess you foresee)? Let's say within the first 9 months after launch, of active players who started shortly after launch? Just so we're on the same page about what expected outcome exactly you're calling "poor design." To kickstart the response, my assumption is 60-80% of crafters processors who care enough to keep trying and actively play the game will get sufficient Freehold access for this purpose one way or another, and become proficient crafters processors within 9 months. Because there are only so many players competing for the available Freeholds on a server, a substantial portion of the access will be gained through sharing, and crafters processors will be among the more driven subset of the Freehold competition. And that sounds like perfectly great game design to me. Where competition matters, and progression requires effort and offers a challenge. And the remaining 20-40% can either shift their priorities, or keep saving up the money they're not spending on Freeholds, and catch up later. Or both, really. It isn't even as if setting this restriction where it is actually adds anything to the game. If the restriction is shifted from level 30 and moved to only being applicable to rare components, the notion of exclusivity is still in place (and then exists where it should), but the ability to progress through the normal leveling progression path is left in place. However, I think it will be more than 50%.
Noaani wrote: » However, I think it will be more than 50%.
