Leveling Speed

Wiki says the following:

On release the developers anticipate max level should be attainable in approximately 45 days if playing 4-6 hours per day.

This is equal to ~225 hours to reach level 50. What is your opinion about it? Would you like it to be faster or slower?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Flanker

nanfoodle wrote: »

You seem to be the only one defending your stance on the topic

And the most upvoted comments under the poll that @Zehlan referred to in another thread

Flanker wrote: »

nanfoodle

You reply but cut out the part of my statement that makes it true lol "You seem to be the only one defending your stance on the topic." Sure people have posted but walked away for what ever reason. Seen the logic of the other posts, dont really care and posted just to be part of the forums. You are alone defending this topic.

nanfoodle

Flanker wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

You seem to be the only one defending your stance on the topic

And the most upvoted comments under the poll that @Zehlan referred to in another thread

Flanker wrote: »

How many pages ago was that?

Flanker

nanfoodle wrote: »

How many pages ago was that?

Exactly. People normally don't read everything in a thread with 10-15 pages. Usually it's the first and the last page/pages. Therefore, spamming, switching topics etc. is a reliable way to kill any meaningful discussion. Not even mentioning that Dygz and Noanni have 9700+ and 15000+ post comments

Link to original comment with my reference: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/472821/#Comment_472821

@Zehlan bringing up the first poll:
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/472937/#Comment_472937

Me breaking down the results of the first poll and pointing out the comment section was intentionally ignored:
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/comment/472953/#Comment_472953

Zehlan

I feel liking we are whipping a dead horse so i'll make this my last post on the 225 hours.
The polls show the majority is satisfied 225 or 45 day equivalent. Flanker points out that in the comments people say that they would prefer longer but what is missed is those people voted in the poll and they lost so what they say in comments doesn't suddenly give them bonus votes or make it that they have to get an equal share. Basically Intrepid found a number that the majority of people were willing to compromise on that includes those who might prefer faster and those who might prefer slower and that number is 225. Now is everyone going to be happy of course not,

To quote a Legend in tv and film
"“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one" - Spock(Leonard Nimoy)

With that I am done gonna play some space marines 2!

Flanker

Zehlan wrote: »

The polls show the majority is satisfied 225 or 45 day equivalent.

The Danning-Krueger effect hit you hard, if you genuinely think that looking at the highest voted number is a sufficient analysis. If you didn't manage to comprehend it by now, there is no point in explaining simple things to you for 27th time.

Not to mention that according to the results of the poll YOU brought up - 44,4% of players would like leveling to take AT LEAST 90 days.

Flanker wrote: »

I'd like to point out that in that poll...

173 + 89 + 67 = 330 players would like leveling to take at least 90 days

Which is...

330 / (413 + 173 + 89 + 67) x 100% = 44,4%

Not even mentioning that the weighed mean equals to ~100 days

And not even mentioning this:

Flanker wrote: »

Let's make some simple calculations then (you like calculations, don't you?)

And I hope you are aware of the difference between the arithmetic mean and weighed mean. Anyway, you can google it.

600 x 100 = 60,000
449 x 200 = 89,800
291 x 300 = 87,300
234 x 500 = 117,000
401 x 1000 = 401,000

60,000 + 89,800 + 87,300 + 117,000 + 401,000 = 755,100

Total number of voters:
600 + 449 + 291 + 234 + 401 = 1975

The weighed mean:
755,100 / 1975 = ~382 hours.

So on average, the voters would like to take a player to spend approximately 382 hours to reach the max level under condition of ...[/b]

Zehlan wrote: »

the server already has metropolis nodes, so you're not time gated by the node system when it comes to leveling.

I don't think I need to explain that leveling in those conditions will be significantly faster than leveling on launch, do I?

So thank you for bringing this up and proving my point once again.

Zehlan wrote: »

Flanker points out that in the comments people say that they would prefer longer but what is missed is those people voted in the poll

Dude, do you want me to quote again how you brought up the 1st poll in a parallel thread and when I asked to take comments into account - you said they are irrelevant. But in this thread, you literally appealed to comments BECAUSE THEY ALIGNED WITH YOUR OPINION.

If that is not hypocrisy, then I don't know what is. Either ALL comments matter or NONE of them matter. You can't use them when it suits you and ignore them when they don't. It's just another fallacy from a very long list that you use.

Zehlan wrote: »

and they lost

It's not about "winning or losing" - it's not an election. It's about looking at people's opinions and preferences and finding the option that takes into account ALL opinions. ALL, not just the opinions of the segment of the player base that you belong to.

And for that purpose, I've made calculations above and we found out what the weighed mean is, because out of all possible numbers in this poll, the weighed mean is the most objective one that takes into account all opinions proportionally to the number of voters for each option.

Zehlan wrote: »

Basically Intrepid found a number that the majority of people were willing to compromise

WRONG. This is factually WRONG. Steven mentioned 45 days on May 24th 2017 when the vast majority of existing audience didn't even know that the game exists.

This is a false assumption that you are trying to use as an argument and it is easily debunkable. Source:
https://youtu.be/KCr9yh2Y97I?feature=shared&t=1170

Zehlan wrote: »

Now is everyone going to be happy of course not

It's not about making people happy, it's about "what is good for the game's health, longevity and player retention", while also taking into account the opinions and preferences of THE WHOLE audience.

There are certain things in Ashes that I am unhappy about apart from leveling. Does it mean that I won't play it because of that? No, it doesn't. And same applies to leveling - not everyone will be happy about it, but the vast majority of people will play it anyway, especially if the game ends up being good

Pendragxn

Bro by the time we get Ashes there will be VR/AR ready player one full omni-treadmill haptic feedback suit kind of games. I wouldn’t worry about the leveling speed you’ll be playing plenty of other games too.

Tailz

A slower but more fulfilling experience at each (stage?) would be nice. Feeling accomplishment all the way to the top.

Ungohil

Flanker wrote: »

New title unlocked? I mean, am I that young though? I may look young, but I'm actually 32

I don't know how you are looking (and tbh, I don't care) because I don't watch/listen your content (no offense meant!), I'm only deriving it from your behavior, wording and arguments in this forum.
But, thanks for confirming my assumption - 32 is young indeed. It's a very good age, enjoy this phase of your life as good as possible (although your circumstances are no fun at all! All the best here, again).

Just asking myself how you came to your conclusio that you've "already worked hard" in your life

My yound friend, you are in the 1/3 of you (working) life ;-)

We all hope so. If it's an MMO for decades, what's the issue with longer leveling as long as it's fun, rewarding and enjoyable?

No issue from my side. For me, personally, I've no problem to level my character for about 6 month. But: I'm not playing 10h a day, so I'm just a time-casual player investing 1-3 hours in the evening (at max) and bit more on weekends - and all this not in a regular pace, because my family and job comes first. Friends and hobbies second.

It's not a question whether there be alt or not - it is inevaitable. Their quantity though is an important variable and if it ends up being too high, it may lead to certain unpleasant consequences

Agree. If you can level and maintain 5 alts (example) it seems way to meaningless in terms of choices, challenges, rewards. But, again, personal view, I really would appreciate that 2-3 characters can be leveled, played and maintained in a meaningful way. Why? Because it's a mmoRPG. I'd like to create characters with different races, classes and professions. Sure, one probably will be the "main", which means: Most time investment, most love, most drama, most rewards. But that doesn't mean that I want to play this Human Warrior (just example) 2 decades long. Why should I, if intrepid also is throwing the sneaky Elven rogue to me which I can play in downtimes of my main? No raid guild event happening on Sunday morning? Well, let's play my alt than, right?

I don't recall them saying anything like that. Care to provide a reference?

The short answer is: RolePlayGame.
The long answer is spread into decades of MMO gaming.
The (more) precise answer and reference is: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Alts
Quite all here says: Sure, if you want to create alts, do it. There are a lot of features and concepts that intrepid designed for it. I also provide a comparision at your service: NW. In this game it makes way less sense to level and play alts, because your "one-for-all" character can do - everything. All weapons, all builds, only once race, all professions. Everything. FF14, to a certain grade, is the same. WoW, ESO, GW2 are the opposite. If you want to play a Shaman, of course you need to reroll an Orc, right? If you play a warlock, you play an undead one, right? And be sure that there are millions of night elv demon hunters running around - with warglaives, right?

Well, maybe you use them that way. I've seen the dark side of alts being easy to make and I don't want Ashes to face the consequences of that dark side.

Logging on alts and doing PK all over? Or what do you mean?
Alts/Chars are bound to an account - if an account gets banned, justice happened. For all other cases your loved corruption systems comes in place.

If Intrepid cares to listen and implement certain changes - awesome, it will be good for the game, at least I think so.

True, I'm just fearing to whom they listen more. The real PvX player, or the (hardcore) PvP player.

If they don't - well, guess I'll have alts for artisan skills/PKing with no risk/dungeons/anything else I want or need. It's not the scenario I want, but if it goes that way, I will obviously take advantage of that.

Hm. I think the attitude or reason to play alts lies in variety. Roleplay-wise (race for instance), gameplay-wise (different archetypes/classes, skills, etc.) and profession-wise (different artisan classes, etc.).
You are ofc not playing alts just to harass other people - especially not you, right? Because you are 32, not 12

Flanker

Chaliux wrote: »

Enjoy this phase of your life as good as possible (although your circumstances are no fun at all! All the best here, again)

It may sound counterintuitive, but when it comes to my personal happiness, it's somewhere around the all-time peak in the past year. Going through what I'm going through made me realize once again that I'm an extremely lucky individual as I have a roof over my head, a food in the fridge, my parents who are alive and well and my cat. That's all I need. And Ashes coming soon is a nice bonus.

Chaliux wrote: »

Just asking myself how you came to your conclusio that you've "already worked hard" in your life

At the age of 23 I joined a company as an ordinary sales manager.

Within the first month, I've set the record by bringing 1.5x more revenue to the company, compared to the previous record set by the previous best sales manager. 2 months after that, it was already 2.3x, because I was grinding the same way as I do in MMO. I was making more money as an ordinary sales manager than software devs and C-Level guys.

8 months after I started working at that company, I skipped all stairs and got promoted to basically "the right hand of CEO" who was also the business owner. Throughout the next 2 months, the company's revenue gradually increased to 1.5x and then to 2x.

I was working 7 days a week pretty much 24/7 with rare days off for a couple of years, leading 3 out of 4 departments: Sales, Customer Support and HR. Our team grew from 8 people to 40+ people.

Eventually, I managed to automate a huge part of the workflow, refine SOPs and delegate a lot of things. As a result, instead of 24/7 grind, I probably worked for a few days per month. It came to the point when once per 1-2 months the CEO sent me a message from Thailand where he relocated to, asking "Is everything ok?" and my reply was always "Yes". Because it was. It was until the war started and the company, unfortunately, ceased to exist.

As long as I managed to free up a decent amount of time, me and one girl (a very close friend with very big benefits) got a crazy idea to start making content for... you know, a different kind of YouTube. I didn't know much about the industry and it wasn't so hyped back then as it is now, so we started from scratch. A year later, we already had 100+ million views across all the platforms and a contract offer from a studio that we accepted on our terms (and declined some others). Then I got kind of bored of it and switched to something else. But the whole thing ended up being a success. Despite the fact we initially started it for fun, it brought a decent amount of money.

That's not the full story of my life, but a part of it.

Chaliux wrote: »

My yound friend, you are in the 1/3 of you (working) life ;-)

No. Unless humanity comes to immortality (which is highly unlikely), I don't intend to live long for reasons that I'm not going to share here.

Chaliux wrote: »

I really would appreciate that 2-3 characters can be leveled, played and maintained in a meaningful way.

If you intend to play Ashes for a year or more, I doubt that it's gonna be a problem.

Chaliux wrote: »

Logging on alts and doing PK all over? Or what do you mean?

I'm not going to share it here, as I don't want to give people ideas. What I mentioned previously about alts is enough to take that into account.

Chaliux wrote: »

True, I'm just fearing to whom they listen more. The real PvX player, or the (hardcore) PvP player.

I'm not a hardcore PvP player, I'm more of PvX player, as I enjoy and dedicate a lot of time to PvE/economy/gathering/crafting as well - my New World experience is a perfect example of that.

Chaliux wrote: »

You are ofc not playing alts just to harass other people - especially not you, right?

I am not a fan of harassing people for no reason. Because I see no point in doing that and I get no satisfaction from that. But when it comes to competition, I see no reason not to use everything I possibly can (obviously, excluding things that are not allowed by ToS)

Pendragxn

@Flanker TMI bro! Hey let’s all just be nice to each other we can all agree to disagree it’s perfectly healthy to have discussions. Let us not make it toxic it’s only a game guys no stress

Flanker

Pendragxn wrote: »

Hey let’s all just be nice to each other we can all agree to disagree it’s perfectly healthy to have discussions. Let us not make it toxic it’s only a game guys no stress

I totally agree. If at some point you watch a podcast with me and @Dygz debating, you might notice that I remain calm and patient

RocketFarmer

I take it that the issue isn’t about getting to max level fast, but gaining the incremental rewards that bring you from a pathetic scrub 1st level character to the all world superstar.

The other side of the coin is what we’d refer in other games like WOW as time in the zone. Meaning you and a collection of players of similar level ranges play the content in that zone, whether PVE or PVP. I’ll refer that feature as a Tier, since in Ashes the nodes change over time so that you can stay longer in the physical location, even calling it home, but the gap between player levels could be pretty extreme. Which is also why they want a mentor system so players at different levels have interactions to the degree the place feels more alive.

My view of the Tier versus Leveling is that a game should have a handful of tiers that supports the amount of cooperative or competitive play you’re after. I think 3-5 tiers on the low end, and you could have anywhere from 10 to 15 levels within each Tier. Most expansions tend to go in the direction of adding a next higher tier with content to go with it. So none of this is really new.

Each archetype should have a sufficient collection of skills, abilities or what not that you won’t get them all. That’s key to character variety. So 10-15 “upgrades” ranging from signature skills/abilities to utility skills/abilities would be what that would look like for progression within a Tier. I also think there’s an archetype or character quest achievement that should be completed to either advance to the next level or tier. That’s aside from crafting levels, religion levels or some other type of leveling than the combat leveling we more commonly refer to as leveling.

The point of the tier structure is that the player should be able to field a competitive character without thinking they have to rush to that next level, power grab. Granted, for some players they’ll always go for that next level with all the goodies. The things that tend to offset that behavior is being under geared because you didn’t farm enough resources or currency to either find, craft or purchase the gear and other resources you need for that next level or tier. But then the counter strategy is get the power leveling done and then go back to increase those other levels to acquire that gear/resources. And I think it’s perfectly fine to play the way you want.

Current proposed design is to increase your level after 4.5 hours. For some that’s two game sessions, others one and some they might hit 2-3 levels in one long session. Looks like they are targeting about 5 levels per week, which corresponds to an in game season (Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter) — providing a nice in game feeling of time to level without the out of game boredom that would be three months of real world time waiting. If you’re focused on power leveling. A lot of games will have a nonlinear progression where you level quickly at first, but slow down the further you go, or they require you to play up in the challenge level to maintain that “quick” pace. And you can of course take your time in doing other stuff, but then would it be disingenuous to complain about slow leveling?

If you enjoy playing alts there may even be benefits in having characters remain at these different tiers to supply the game economy that your main character needs, among others. That’s especially true if you don’t have a steady stream of new players.

I’m looking forward to Alpha 2 to see what their pace of leveling feels like. We can do all of the theorizing we want, but until we test we’re just dealing in hypotheticals.

Noaani

Flanker wrote: »

What does that even mean lol? What did I do to "normalize" them? There is no such thing, it is the numbers that never lie when handled and interpreted properly.

I haven't brought up the poll results. Zehlan used them as an argument and I said "Fine, let's analyze the poll results properly". It's funny how you never said that about the first poll in the another thread - guess the results there were acceptable for you, but these results aren't, so you say that the poll is irrelevant.

The term "normalize" as it relates to stats and mathematical can actually have multiple meanings, so may not have been the best teem to use - however the point that what you did is not valid should have been obvious.

You don't take poll results and average them. 5 people voting for 1 and 5 people voting for 10 is not the same as 10 people voting for 5.5.

This is a method of data manipulation that is used when those running the poll want a result in the middle. The specific ranges given in a poll like this can also be used to skew the results to a particular desired result.

A poll can not be used to tell anything other than how many players prefer each given option over and above the other available options. Any result that anyone tries to arrive at other than this is simply an invalid notion.

If a poll asks if people want leveling to be 100 hours, 200 hours or 300 hours, you have no idea how many people would prefer 150 hours. You ONLY know the preferences of the respondents for the options given.

Nothing else can ever be taken from a poll without manipulating the data.

Edit; if others did it, you can feel free to go back and call them out on it. I called you out because you are who I saw do it.

If you do call them our and you @ me, I'll even back you up if that is indeed what they have done, because it isn't about whose side anyone is on, it is about not letting people manipulate data.

The only "bias" in regards to who I would call out is based on posts I read. If I know I generally agree with a poster, I usually won't bother reading their posts. If I know I am likely to disagree and thus post in response, I'm more likely to read. Thus, I am more likely to read posts of people I disagree with, and so more likely to see this kind of thing happen in posts from posters I disagree with.

Again though, that doesn't mean I'd let it slide if it was someone I agreed with.

Flanker

Noaani wrote: »

You don't take poll results and average them

Excuse me, according to whom? According to you? What is this statement?

Noaani wrote: »

This is a method of data manipulation that is used when those running the poll want a result in the middle

There is no manipulation here, it's basic math. Similar to median income, for example, that is widely used.

Noaani wrote: »

The specific ranges given in a poll like this can also be used to skew the results to a particular desired result.

Exactly, same as using a poll with a loaded question or reply options like "At least a year, i dont care about casuals". What you are trying to do here is to use an argument saying "Oh, the poll is not super perfectly ideal" - well, duh, not a single poll is 10/10 perfectly objective. It's the same as Ashes in Alpha 2 - it doesn't need to be perfect (because it's impossible), but it needs to be good enough and have a representative sampling of respondents. Otherwise, you won't get anywhere with such logic.

It works the same way for the other side as well - if there was an option for 3000 hours, I would vote for it. But there was no such option, so I had to choose from those that are available.

Noaani wrote: »

A poll can not be used to tell anything other than how many players prefer each given option over and above the other available options. Any result that anyone tries to arrive at other than this is simply an invalid notion.

The only reason why you write this is because of the calculations I've made above that show the weighed mean. If 95% of people voted for the first option, the chance of you writing this will be close to non-existent.

Noaani wrote: »

If a poll asks if people want leveling to be 100 hours, 200 hours or 300 hours, you have no idea how many people would prefer 150 hours. You ONLY know the preferences of the respondents for the options given.

That's why you calculate the weighed mean, simple as that. It's the most accurate representation of the average result based on the number of people that voted for every single option, taking into account the measurable "weight" of the options.

How many of those who voted for 200 hours would be unhappy, if it is gonna be 214 hours? Apparently, not many, because the difference is not signifcant. Would a single person not play the game because of that? I highly doubt it.

How many of those who voted for 200 hours would be unhappy, if it is gonna be 950 hours? Probably much more, right? But does it mean that if it ends up being 950 hours - all of them will immediately bounce? Of course not. Especially, if leveling is rewarding and there are many various ways to grind XP. As it is in Ashes.

As I said, it's not a question of players being happy or unhappy. It's a question whether they will play or not. And if Intrepid delivers everything they promised - the overwhelming majority of people will play it anyway. If you can't comprehend this simple point, then I'm sorry - it's on you.

Noaani wrote: »

Nothing else can ever be taken from a poll without manipulating the data.

Mhm, according to whom again?

Noaani wrote: »

I called you out because you are who I saw do it.

I don't mind being "called out" for giving free math classes to certain individuals who missed elementary school.

P.S. If apart from post farming you are also interested in farming forum likes, keep posting - @Zehlan would like literally anything, no matter whether it makes sense or not

Noaani

Flanker wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

You don't take poll results and average them

Excuse me, according to whom? According to you? What is this statement?

According to every Statistics major or professor ever.

Again, as I said when i first mentioned this to you, I fully understand that this may be a concept that is foreign to you - however, it is absolutely correct.

Again, as evidence, look at the numbers you yourself came up with. Your results fell right where the least number of votes were - you were claiming thst those people all collectively voted for the thing rhat the smallest group of them actually voted for.

There is no manipulation here, it's basic math.

It is indeed basic math, it is just incorrectly applied.

That's why you calculate the weighed mean, simple as that. It's the most accurate representation of the average result based on the number of people that voted for every single option, taking into account the measurable "weight" of the options.

Except this is an incorrect situation in which to take an average mean.

An average mean should be used for finding an average of a test result, not of a poll vote.

It is an incorrect way to manipulate the data. Again, I am not saying you did this knowingly, but you did it nonetheless.

Flanker

Noaani wrote: »

According to every Statistics major or professor ever.

Another broad meaningless statement. You haven't exceeded your daily quota yet, have you?

Noaani wrote: »

Again, as I said when i first mentioned this to you, I fully understand that this may be a concept that is foreign to you - however, it is absolutely correct.

Correct according to whom? Got any references or same as usual - none?

Noaani wrote: »

you were claiming thst those people all collectively voted for the thing rhat the smallest group of them actually voted for

Lmao, great job on disagreeing with the point that I never made. Clearly a work of a genius who can't comperehend a simple thing:

Flanker wrote: »

That's why you calculate the weighed mean, simple as that. It's the most accurate representation of the average result based on the number of people that voted for every single option, taking into account the measurable "weight" of the options.

How many of those who voted for 200 hours would be unhappy, if it is gonna be 214 hours? Apparently, not many, because the difference is not signifcant. Would a single person not play the game because of that? I highly doubt it.

How many of those who voted for 200 hours would be unhappy, if it is gonna be 950 hours? Probably much more, right? But does it mean that if it ends up being 950 hours - all of them will immediately bounce? Of course not. Especially, if leveling is rewarding and there are many various ways to grind XP. As it is in Ashes.

As I said, it's not a question of players being happy or unhappy. It's a question whether they will play or not. And if Intrepid delivers everything they promised - the overwhelming majority of people will play it anyway. If you can't comprehend this simple point, then I'm sorry - it's on you.

> There is no outcome that will please everyone
> It doesn't mean that all opinions must be ignored
> The result takes into account ALL opinions, not only those you personally prefer
> Taking that result will not mean that 100% or even the majority of players won't play the game

Flanker wrote: »

Especially, if leveling is rewarding and there are many various ways to grind XP. As it is in Ashes.

I don't know what other explanation could possibly find its way inside your head. Could be simpler than that.

Noaani wrote: »

It is indeed basic math, it is just incorrectly applied.

Wish we could see how in parallel universe where 95% voted for the first option you scream on top of the lungs that poll are always accurate.

Noaani wrote: »

Except this is an incorrect situation in which to take an average mean.

An average mean should be used for finding an average of a test result, not of a poll vote.

Oh, I see. Apparently, you don't even know what's the difference between "average mean" and "weighed mean". Not surprised.

Noaani wrote: »

It is an incorrect way to manipulate the data. Again, I am not saying you did this knowingly, but you did it nonetheless.

What's the "correct way to manipulate data"? I'd trust your word as you're a known expert when it comes to all sorts of primitive manipulations

Depraved

slow levelign in l2 was fine because there weren't a lot of other things to do beside killing mobs. don't get me wrong, killing mobs in l2 was quite fun and enjoyable, more than it is in other games, for me at least, but that's it. you go to a farming spot, kill mobs for hours and PVP. if you have a quest, you do the same thing, go to a spot and kill mobs. gearing up? go to a spot and kill mobs.

other than a few quests here and there and killing bosses, all you did 95% of the time was to kill mobs. the reason it was meaningful in l2 was because each level mattered and would make you significantly stronger. suddenly, you went from killing a mob in 3 hits down to 2 hits, for example, which was significant (mostly because of SS). also, you just had more stats and hidden stats in PVP which would give you an advantage.

if ashes leveling got slower, each level needs to matter a lot, to the point where being one or two levels ahead of someone would make it nearly impossible for the lower level to beat you. besides, there are lots of activities to do in ashes, not just kill mobs (I prefer killing mobs over other things btw), plus, it will make it easier for people who join in the future to catch up.

Dygz

RocketFarmer wrote: »

I take it that the issue isn’t about getting to max level fast, but gaining the incremental rewards that bring you from a pathetic scrub 1st level character to the all world superstar.

Exactly.

RocketFarmer wrote: »

My view of the Tier versus Leveling is that a game should have a handful of tiers that supports the amount of cooperative or competitive play you’re after. I think 3-5 tiers on the low end, and you could have anywhere from 10 to 15 levels within each Tier. Most expansions tend to go in the direction of adding a next higher tier with content to go with it. So none of this is really new.

The new part would be that Ashes is a dynamic game rather than a static game. Seasonal Update and Expansion content will still be associated with all Node Stages, it won't just be Stage 6+ content - so how many of regions of each "Tier" will always be determined by how many Nodes are at a particular Stage.

RocketFarmer wrote: »

The point of the tier structure is that the player should be able to field a competitive character without thinking they have to rush to that next level, power grab. Granted, for some players they’ll always go for that next level with all the goodies. The things that tend to offset that behavior is being under geared because you didn’t farm enough resources or currency to either find, craft or purchase the gear and other resources you need for that next level or tier. But then the counter strategy is get the power leveling done and then go back to increase those other levels to acquire that gear/resources. And I think it’s perfectly fine to play the way you want.

Players shouldn't feel a need to rush. At the same time, they should not feel like they are being arbitrarily delayed from reaching the next Level.
When I have a game session intended to focus on Leveling the Adventurer/Class path, I have a goal of the percentage of XP Bar progress I want to complete. Typically, the XP Progress Bar is divided into 10 portions.
At low Levels, I might have a goal of increasing my Level by 2 or 3 XP Levels of Progress Bars in 2 hours.
At mid Levels, I might have a goal of increasing my Level by 1/2 Level (5 portions of the XP Progress Bar) in 2 hours.
At high Levels, I might have a goal of increasing my Level by 1/10 Level (1 portion of the XP Progress Bar) in 2 hours.
That's probably going to factor in required Gear Score acquisition.
The issue with arbitrarily increasing to be 500 hours or 1000 hours is - I'm not going to play a game where I'm in the mid Levels and, after playing 4 hours of focused gameplay to increase my Adventurer/Class Level, I only have 1 or 2 portions of the XP Progress Bar filled.
Those are hypothetical numbers - I haven't actually calculated the threshold that cause me to quit playing when I realize I've hit a Hell Level. I just quit playing and then return to playing the game once I hear the Hell Levels have been nerfed.
I just know there have been times when I reach a point where I think, "Wait a second? Why is it taking crazy hours of focused gameplay to reach the next Level? This is a tedious waste of time. I going to go play a different game that is not this tedious."

RocketFarmer wrote: »

Current proposed design is to increase your level after 4.5 hours. For some that’s two game sessions, others one and some they might hit 2-3 levels in one long session. Looks like they are targeting about 5 levels per week, which corresponds to an in game season (Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter) — providing a nice in game feeling of time to level without the out of game boredom that would be three months of real world time waiting. If you’re focused on power leveling. A lot of games will have a nonlinear progression where you level quickly at first, but slow down the further you go, or they require you to play up in the challenge level to maintain that “quick” pace. And you can of course take your time in doing other stuff, but then would it be disingenuous to complain about slow leveling?

Yep. Ashes has plenty of other stuff to do if you want to extend reaching Level 50 Adventurer past 45 days of 4 hour game sessions.

RocketFarmer wrote: »

If you enjoy playing alts there may even be benefits in having characters remain at these different tiers to supply the game economy that your main character needs, among others. That’s especially true if you don’t have a steady stream of new players.

Yep. And, actually, I think I typically stop playing an MMORPG once my alt also hits a Hell Level.
But, slow Leveling speed has not been a thing for 10+ years now, so... difficult to remember the specifics.

RocketFarmer wrote: »

I’m looking forward to Alpha 2 to see what their pace of leveling feels like. We can do all of the theorizing we want, but until we test we’re just dealing in hypotheticals.

Well, I don't think we will have a true idea of Leveling speed until Beta.
We're testing, not playing. There will be various forms of Level boosting during Alpha testing.

Flanker

Dygz wrote: »

Yep. Ashes has plenty of other stuff to do if you want to extend reaching Level 50 Adventurer past 45 days of 4 hour game sessions.

Yeah, and guess what? That can also feel rewarding - successfully completing events, completing commission to help your node grow, attacking/defending caravans, increasing your artisan skill levels etc.

But somehow, only achieving "leveling milestones" are taken into account and everything else is ignored, despite you saying it right here: there is plenty of other stuff to do in game.

During our debate, I stated a pretty simple and obvious fact that people tend to value things more, if getting/achieving them requires times and efforts. As a result, it leads to more powerful dopamine doses.

You accused me in "chasing those dopamine doses" and said that this is why I suggest longer leveling. Which is not really the reason - that's the natural consequence of putting time and effort in order to achieve the goal.

Meanwhile, you write this:

Dygz wrote: »

When I have a game session intended to focus on Leveling the Adventurer/Class path, I have a goal of the percentage of XP Bar progress I want to complete. Typically, the XP Progress Bar is divided into 10 portions.
At low Levels, I might have a goal of increasing my Level by 2 or 3 XP Levels of Progress Bars in 2 hours.
At mid Levels, I might have a goal of increasing my Level by 1/2 Level (5 portions of the XP Progress Bar) in 2 hours.
At high Levels, I might have a goal of increasing my Level by 1/10 Level (1 portion of the XP Progress Bar) in 2 hours.
That's probably going to factor in required Gear Score acquisition.
The issue with arbitrarily increasing to be 500 hours or 1000 hours is - I'm not going to play a game where I'm in the mid Levels and, after playing 4 hours of focused gameplay to increase my Adventurer/Class Level, I only have 1 or 2 portions of the XP Progress Bar filled.
Those are hypothetical numbers - I haven't actually calculated the threshold that cause me to quit playing when I realize I've hit a Hell Level. I just quit playing and then return to playing the game once I hear the Hell Levels have been nerfed.
I just know there have been times when I reach a point where I think, "Wait a second? Why is it taking crazy hours of focused gameplay to reach the next Level? This is a tedious waste of time. I going to go play a different game that is not this tedious."

And this is pretty much your public confession that you are not a fan of games that don't provide instant gratification or rather "instant gratification according to modern MMO standards".

As well as ignoring the fact that the game provides multiple various sources for your precious "instant gratification" and all you need to do to achieve them is to combine those activities. And if you don't want to combine them - that is your own issue.

So, following your logic, if "chasing powerful dopamine doses" is somehow a bad thing, then "instant gratification according to moden MMO standards" is no different when it comes to the nature of accusation. Actually, I'd say it's even worse as it is one of the reasons why many modern MMOs are... what they are, putting it mildly.

Child Item