There's no risk in moving crafted goods, and that needs to change.

My interest in this game focuses largely on running caravans - and I have a concern about the fact that crafted gear / items don't risk being looted / deleted on death like gatherables / processed goods.

As it stands, I won't stand to gain any profit by moving crafted items, because there's simply no risk in doing so.

I also don't think intrepid currently intends on changing this, because they treat this strictly as a risk of corruption.

I believe this will create an environment where gear floods the market and becomes extremely cheap as crafters sell at a loss in order to gain crafting experience. This in turn will make leveling crafting professions even more expensive than they already are, and create an impenetrable barrier for anyone who doesn't get into the crafting early enough. World of Warcraft has this same market environment and I find it very uncompelling.

If intrepid wants to follow their "Risk v Reward" model, they need to change this.
If intrepid wants a game that allows people to devote themselves to crafting, they need to change this.

Some people might complain that its 'too hardcore' to risk losing gear on death. Perhaps they're right. But I didn't put my hopes in this game for it end up like World of Warcraft.

Albion Online has a great economic model, and I would advise the devs to take some lessons from that game.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Item_deconstruction

DroneTheMask

Ludullu wrote: »

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Item_deconstruction

This still doesn't address the Risk v Reward concern.

Also, seems like a great way to smuggle basic resources to other locations as gear, since they are impervious to PvP.

Tjaeden

DroneTheMask wrote: »

Ludullu wrote: »

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Item_deconstruction

This still doesn't address the Risk v Reward concern.

Also, seems like a great way to smuggle basic resources to other locations as gear, since they are impervious to PvP.

This used to be done in EVE Online. People found the right ships to craft, then would pilot them to the region needed, then recycle them for minerals.

DroneTheMask

Tjaeden wrote: »

DroneTheMask wrote: »

Ludullu wrote: »

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Item_deconstruction

This still doesn't address the Risk v Reward concern.

Also, seems like a great way to smuggle basic resources to other locations as gear, since they are impervious to PvP.

This used to be done in EVE Online. People found the right ships to craft, then would pilot them to the region needed, then recycle them for minerals.

You still risked losing your ship in EVE. Not the case for the crafted gear in Ashes.

Veeshan

I will say i think there need to be gear decay at some point in the game when people max out gear or what not it takes away the need for crafters to make more since people are in theory done with that progression, the only thing that keeps people buying more gear would be with enchanting have a chance to break gear which might be fine but i think not gonna be enough tbh since people will get to a level there comfortable with and not push it past breaking point since the gains are typicaly not worth the risk pushing +10 and above alot of the time.
Imo i think gear should slowly loose max durability when repairing and enchanting will reset the max durability so eventually gear will get 0 dura and then they can try and fix it via enchanting it once eventualy it will break via enchanting and need to be replaced.

Azherae

One of the solutions to this, in the future, is simply to make it impossible to deconstruct items with less than full durability, for anything but the lower tiers of the materials involved with making them.

That said, we're years away from needing to be concerned about stuff like this, though I agree it needs to shift, I just also believe it will.

Ludullu

DroneTheMask wrote: »

This still doesn't address the Risk v Reward concern.

Also, seems like a great way to smuggle basic resources to other locations as gear, since they are impervious to PvP.

If you decide to carry those mats in the form of the items - you're not getting all of them back. That's the decreased risk of losing them for the decreased reward.

You also said it yourself, people already hate that corruption penalties lead to full item loss. If normal people started losing full items on death - the game will be waaaay too niche. Iirc Albion has separation of region types, that go from "you lose nothing" to "you lose everything" (or at least something close to that). Ashes won't have that, because you can be killed any time any where.

You presented your issue as one of a "weak item sink". I presented a few way that make that sink better. I agree with Veeshan and Azherae that the decay/decontruct sinks could be tuned even further, but we've got 0 clue what kind of facets will have on release, so it's difficult to say how tuned those sinks gotta be.

ghojinn

Good way to kill the game.

DroneTheMask

Ludullu wrote: »

DroneTheMask wrote: »

This still doesn't address the Risk v Reward concern.

Also, seems like a great way to smuggle basic resources to other locations as gear, since they are impervious to PvP.

If you decide to carry those mats in the form of the items - you're not getting all of them back. That's the decreased risk of losing them for the decreased reward.

You also said it yourself, people already hate that corruption penalties lead to full item loss. If normal people started losing full items on death - the game will be waaaay too niche. Iirc Albion has separation of region types, that go from "you lose nothing" to "you lose everything" (or at least something close to that). Ashes won't have that, because you can be killed any time any where.

You presented your issue as one of a "weak item sink". I presented a few way that make that sink better. I agree with Veeshan and Azherae that the decay/decontruct sinks could be tuned even further, but we've got 0 clue what kind of facets will have on release, so it's difficult to say how tuned those sinks gotta be.

Yes, there are seperate zones for these. But those safer zones are incredibly inefficient and meant for new players to learn the game. Steven has spoken about adding such noob-friendly zones. But such zones will not be where the serious progression is at.

Additionally, I could imagine a less serious loss scenerio: perhaps it takes a few deaths before gear is destroyed. Either way, I want it possible to make distribution a true focus in the game that some guilds would prefer to rely on others to satisfy a supply chain issue.

DroneTheMask

ghojinn wrote: »

Good way to kill the game.

Game is dead in the water if its too care-bear. EVE and Albion are proof such a decision would not kill the game.

Volgaris

Risks! Risks everywhere! I feel materials and items are more at risk from just moving them to storage than anything else.

At face value I don't think it's a bad idea, I just don't think it's going to work. You want inventory items to drop, not just material items. Or inventory style items to drop out of caravans if they're raided. I mean who's this mechanic for? The bandit players? Who would run caravans? What's the reward for the caravan run what would justify this risk? Don't the attackers already have a large enough incentive to attack?

I like mortal online, I'm okay with full loot. But here. I don't see it. Even if you call Eve and Albion successful, the level of "success" Ashes will probably need is going to require a lot more players. Is Steven trying to make a niche game or one that appeals to a larger player base? Will he adjust one way or the other? Who knows.

The game is far from care-bear. I think the game has enough layers of contention for the players to fight over, adding anymore is just going to turn off a even more people. Tuff challenge to please pvp'rs and pve'rs. I don't see the game being "successful" if they only (or more so) please the pvp'rs.

Arya_Yeshe

I don't think AoC will go beyond losing materials and consumables, on top of it there will be node destruction and item deconstruction add to the losses, and repairing gear will require materials, encouraging deconstruction for repairs. Ship and wagon destruction adds another layer to this.

I would add an Arena where there are tiers where you can gamble 50% or 100% of your own gear

Noaani

DroneTheMask wrote: »

ghojinn wrote: »

Good way to kill the game.

Game is dead in the water if its too care-bear. EVE and Albion are proof such a decision would not kill the game.

EVE and Albion prove that this kind of thing is niche.

Keep in mind, those games have populations in the tens of thousands, ESO, WoW and FFXIV have populations in the millions or tens of millions.

Now, Ashes isn't aiming for the popularity of those three games with millions of players. However, Ashes is planning on supporting an Oceania and Brazil server. Since Oceania players are usually about less than 10% of the EU population of a given game, and 5% of the NA population, that means in order for Ashes to achieve the success Steven has said he wants, and is starting up servers based on attaining that success, Ashes would need to support 10 NA servers and 5 EU servers all at full capacity, just to statistically have a single half population Oceania server.

That actually puts Intrepids required total sustained, long term player population at significantly over a million.

Saying "this thing is proven to work" and then pointing at 2 games that each have 5% or so of the population Ashes needs in order to meet the expectations Steven has set isn't an overly good argument.

Volgaris

Well put. I don't normally agree @Noaani but putting in niche mechanics will make the game niche. That's fine and all, but will Intrepid meet it's goals?

Albion (steamcharts) 11k last 30 minutes. 27k all time peak.
Eve (steamcharts) 2.6k last 30 minutes. 10k all time peak.

That's not many players, I'm not saying their bad games, but they aren't popular. By no means am I advocating for a WoW clone to get the mass appeal. Intrepid seems to what to innovate the MMORPG genre which is good. But this innovation hinges on mechanics deeply embedded in "PvX" mechanics. One being the Caravans, which aren't finished and aren't working as intended. And it seems players don't like them being money printers, I think it's cheesy personally and I have no interest in them, or at least running them. Guild wars were heavily exploited, Node wars are laggy, Node upgrades? gathering is exploitable, crafting is a huge time sink. I haven't seen anything innovative yet, in fact I see mistakes made that should have been avoided because they were lessons learned from other games that already made the mistakes. I guess what I'm saying is they haven't done a good job copying the good from other games, I doubt that'll change if they start pulling ideas from niche games.

Noaani

Volgaris wrote: »

I guess what I'm saying is they haven't done a good job copying the good from other games, I doubt that'll change if they start pulling ideas from niche games.

This is kind of the main argument I have had for the last 5 years or so.

Ashes is taking Archeages farms and turning them in to freeholds. The problem is, Steven ignored what made farms in Archeage so good, and as a result freeholds in Ashes will not be a shitstain on farms in Archeage. They just aren't in the same ballpark.

Same with glint. It is a copy - essentially - of Archeages coin purses. A basic drop you get from mobs that you then process in some manner to get coin. The problem is, all the added shit with glint means it is trying to be more than coin purses, and as a result is functionally less. The need to transport glint means it will never be as liked as coin purses in Archeage were, it's two systems hiding in a trenchcoat, trying to be one system.

I could go on with a number of other things - but the point remains that in most of the things Intrepid are taking from other games, they are failing to understand what made people like them originally.

Honestly, this even extends to fast travel. People like a lack of fast travel because it makes a small world feel bigger. However, if you have a big world, you don't need to make it feel bigger.

Volgaris

Yep, I can agree with most of that. It does seem they're missing the mark when they're 'copying' systems from other games. Not just limited to the glint/trade packs ect.. Fast travel though I do lean towards no fast travel. There will be airships and boats. So depending on the balance that could be enough. I want to believe Steven has an end vision of the game, but they keep asking for suggestions, which makes me believe they don't have a direction. And there's basically two main groups of people in the game and forums. PvP and PvE players, and in general they just will never agree and Intrepid wants to please them both with this "PvX" genre. This seems to be whats causing the missteps when they do copy the systems from each PvP and PvE systems and adapting to "PvX". Most MMOs have PvP and PvE servers, but they are in reality a PvE game with PvP elements that can be turned on for the PvP servers. I see the appeal of a PvP focused game with PvE elements to support the PvP, the problem is PvE players are less tolerant than PvP players, and more in number. Probably 9:1 ratio PvE players to PvP players. Sorry for the rant, but I think this is at the core of the problems the game has currently. If Intrepid doesn't appeal to the PvE crowd enough they won't have enough players. If they appeal to the PvE crowd too much it'll just be the same as any other post WoW game that has failed. IMO the game has to be rooted in PvE and they need to innovate PvP that doesn't disrupt too much of the PvE, too much interruption to PvE and you'll lose those players. Not enough meaningful PvP and they end up losing those players and it'd be really similar to past games.

Satuye

If we are worried about the viability of the profession, Just need to make it so you need Crafted item to repair your Gear.
As for the adding more risk - Per the PVPer. Lets get some risk for attacking Caravans and losing

Aszkalon

I think whenever i would spawn a Caravan i would get f~ed over, though.

Azherae

Aszkalon wrote: »

I think whenever i would spawn a Caravan i would get f~ed over, though.

Well, the suggestion there would be 'become a crafter so you don't need to spawn a Caravan', in terms of the discussion in this post.

DroneTheMask

Noaani wrote: »

DroneTheMask wrote: »

ghojinn wrote: »

Good way to kill the game.

Game is dead in the water if its too care-bear. EVE and Albion are proof such a decision would not kill the game.

EVE and Albion prove that this kind of thing is niche.

Keep in mind, those games have populations in the tens of thousands, ESO, WoW and FFXIV have populations in the millions or tens of millions.

Now, Ashes isn't aiming for the popularity of those three games with millions of players. However, Ashes is planning on supporting an Oceania and Brazil server. Since Oceania players are usually about less than 10% of the EU population of a given game, and 5% of the NA population, that means in order for Ashes to achieve the success Steven has said he wants, and is starting up servers based on attaining that success, Ashes would need to support 10 NA servers and 5 EU servers all at full capacity, just to statistically have a single half population Oceania server.

That actually puts Intrepids required total sustained, long term player population at significantly over a million.

Saying "this thing is proven to work" and then pointing at 2 games that each have 5% or so of the population Ashes needs in order to meet the expectations Steven has set isn't an overly good argument.

These games' success isn't in the membership alone. It's in the micro-transactions as well. Steven isn't banking on subs alone to meet his mark either. Neither do any of the games you've mentioned.

Steven is also betting that his game will succeed due to his focus on the games integrity (Anti-gold buying / botting / p2w / etc), which we don't see in any other MMO on the market. You can't measure how this will affect his success, but he's making that gamble knowingly. If he's confident enough to forward $40+ million into his game, we can assume he's not going to sacrifice his core tenants to avoid being 'niche'. He's stated already this will not be a game for everyone. He's entirely focused on risk and reward game design, which I've already argued is why they should consider my OP.

He's not here to compete with WoW, ESO, or FFXIV. So bringing them up is entirely irrelevent. This game will not be even similar to those games.

Child Item