I appreciate the time and effort everyone is putting into testing and providing feedback on the game. In the discussion below, I have outlined what I believe are the most pressing issues that should be addressed first to ensure a smoother and more rewarding experience for all players. These topics focus on key aspects of Glint availability, economic balance, PvP incentives, and progression systems, highlighting areas where small adjustments could make a big impact.
I encourage everyone to read through these points and consider how they affect gameplay as a whole. By tackling these areas early, we can help create a more engaging and well-balanced experience moving forward. Avoiding rework for the very passionate development teams, no one enjoying revisiting things multiple times.
Glint Drop & Game Balance Concerns
Mob Availability & Glint Drops
Below Level 15 Mobs
No Stars: 7,493
One Star: 1,455
Two Stars: 482
Three Stars: 631
Total: 10,061
Above Level 15 MobsNo Stars: 1,357 (18% of prior availability)
One Star: 317 (21.7% of prior availability)
Two Stars: 443 (Comparable to prior availability)
Three Stars: 2,748 (4x increase)
Total: 4,865 (50% reduction in available mobs that drop Glint at player level 25)
While a
50% overall reduction in Glint-dropping mobs seems bad on paper, the actual situation is worse. The majority of remaining mobs are
Three-Star or higher, making them far less soloable. This means players are now forced into
competent groups to farm efficiently, leading to
hours of grinding—which would be fine in an MMO if not for some key issues.
__________________________________________________________________________
Glint Waste from Death & Grouping Issues
In a party system, players lose
25% of their Glint upon death with an in-place revive. This may seem reasonable, but in practice, it leads to frustration and resentment. A single death often results in
repeated deaths, compounding the loss—
25% per death and possibly 50% on the final one.
The problem isn't just the loss itself, but the
lack of player agency. This system penalizes players
based on group performance, not their individual skill. Unlike other mechanics where a player can learn and adapt,
this loss is out of their control, leading to blame, frustration, and a strong deterrent from grouping.
This is a
critical red flag for developers. It creates the same frustration as
inventory disappearing due to a bug or a caravan falling through the map—things players cannot avoid through skill or strategy. Grouping should not feel like a penalty.
Possible solutions include:
Introducing
craftable inventory-less bags that
reduce Glint loss on death (e.g., 50-55% reduction for uncommon bags, 80-90% for legendary).
Implementing a
dynamic scaling system that reduces Glint loss based on group size, ensuring that larger groups aren't disproportionately punished.
There are many
ways to address this issue without making grouping feel like a liability.
__________________________________________________________________________
Zero Glint Drops in Some Areas
Many players, including myself and my guildmates, have noticed
some areas have a 0% Glint drop rate floor. This must be removed.
If players are
forced into Three-Star mobs due to the removal of lower-star mobs, then
every 8 kills should not result in Zero Glint. When compounded over hours of grinding, this system
kills player motivation. Imagine 10 rotation/drop for you result in nothing, cause i've seen it multiple times personally
I've personally stopped engaging in
endgame POIs and dungeons because they are simply
not rewarding. Instead, I now focus on
smaller 3-5 man groups, avoiding content that should be meaningful.
The solution is simple:
Ensure all Two-Star and higher mobs have base Glint drops.
Eliminate situations where players receive 0 Glint after multiple kills/drops.
Reduce the extreme variance in Glint gain between different groups.
When players walk away with
1/4 of what others party members are earning for the same effort, resentment builds. A minor variance is fine, but the
current disparity is extreme.
__________________________________________________________________________
PvP Zones Need Buffed Glint Drops
PvP zones
must offer at least 2x Glint drops to incentivize risk and reward.
Here’s the logic:
- Steven wants contention and risk-reward mechanics.
- PvP zones previously had Shardlings, an excellent source of Glint for solo and small-group players.
- Devs removed this by nerfing their levels, making them no longer drop Glint past level 23—without explanation.
This change
removed one of the best congestion zones for PvP, where
players actively fought over resources. Why discourage
consensual PvP interactions in a
PvP zone?
Currently,
PvP zones serve no purpose beyond being
caravan routes. There are
no increased Glint rewards, no increased harvesting benefits, and no compelling reason to engage with them.
The solution:
- Double Glint drops in PvP zones. The risk is PvP, so the reward should match.
- Increase harvesting rewards in PvP zones. Double gear rarity & gear quantity, with a high chance of heroic/epic/legendary drops (obviously nothing absurd).
- Improve clarity and transparency on PvP zone changes. The lack of communication is frustrating players.
Currently,
leveling up feels like a penalty rather than a progression system. The fact that I can
farm more Glint in 4 hours on a fresh toon than my level 25 character is a major design flaw.
__________________________________________________________________________
Glint TL;DR (Fixes Needed)
Remove zero-Glint drops from Two & Three-Star mobs.
Increase soloable mob availability (current 18% availability compared to low-level players is excessive).
Buff PvP zones with at least 2x Glint drops.
Ensure all PvP zone mobs drop Glint (since the PvP itself is the risk factor).
Introduce a harvesting bonus in PvP zones to encourage resource conflict.
Right now, the game feels like it’s
restricting player options rather than expanding them. These changes would
reintroduce player agency, increase engagement, and fix major progression bottlenecks.
__________________________________________________________________________
Economy Analysis & Bottlenecks
The current economy is constrained by multiple bottlenecks, making any ongoing balance adjustments
premature and ineffective. Given the
interconnected nature of the economy, any changes implemented now
may require reversal later, rendering them a
waste of development time. While I acknowledge Steven’s comments on enchanting and gear balance, my focus (here) is on parallel systems that directly impact the in-game economy.
Harvesting
There has been significant discussion about
static node quality (i.e., nodes spawning with Heroic/Epic/Legendary base rarity). While I
mildly agree with concerns, I believe it’s premature to make adjustments.
Why Static Nodes Are Fine (For Now)
- The world is only 5% accessible—once the full world is available, static nodes will be less contested and more valuable.
- End-game harvesting tools, buffs, and dynamic world systems (stars, seasons, etc.) aren’t implemented yet, meaning the current system is barebones and subject to future enhancement.
The Real Issue: Hunting
Hunting is a
Level 0 base spawn with no quality tiers, making it the
only resource-gathering system without rarity scaling. Every other gathering system allows for higher-quality materials, but Hunting’s lack of scaling
creates a trickle-down effect that weakens
multiple professions, including:
- Cooking
- Alchemy
- Husbandry
- Tanning
- Stone Masonry
This results in
mediocre outputs across the entire economy, preventing top-tier crafting, resource bags, processing materials, and gear enhancements from being fully realized.
Why This Matters for Economic Balance
If Hunting lacks
Epic and Legendary materials, players are:
- Unable to craft top-end harvesting tools
- Restricted from making high-quality armor/weapons due to leather scarcity
- Forced to rely on lower-quality food buffs and crafting materials
This
cripples economic data collection, as the current market
operates under broken conditions. Balancing the economy before fixing this is
like measuring a car's performance with a flat tire—the data is irrelevant because the system is fundamentally
incomplete.
Proposed Fix
Hunting should follow
the same rarity distribution as other resources. If trees, for example, yield Epic and Legendary woods at a
known rate, then Hunting should match those drop rates for high-tier carcasses and animals.
TL;DR: Fix Hunting Rarity!
Without this fix, the entire economy
remains stuck in mediocrity, and any balance adjustments made beforehand are based on
flawed data.
__________________________________________________________________________
Caravans
Overall, the
caravan system is solid, but there are a
few issues that need addressing:
1. Caravan Clipping (Falling Through the World)
There should be a
failsafe layer beneath the world that detects when a caravan
falls under the mesh and reverts it back to a valid location. Losing an entire shipment because of a bug is
unacceptable.
2. Destruction Mechanics
Instead of 100% part loss, caravan destruction should include an RNG-based salvage system, where a percentage of caravan parts are recoverable rather than everything being wiped.
3. Allow
people in groups to declare defend or attack without passing lead/dropping groups. Additionally
Don't allow outside declaration healing, if they try to heal someone declared on an event, stop it from casting. Or PVP force flag that healer AT A MINIMUM.
4. Trade Bureau Discounts Are Insufficient
The original
50% discount was reasonable.
The current
5% discount is pointless and provides no meaningful incentive to use the system.
5. Guild Leveling & Commodity Trade Distance
Currently, the
first five guild levels feel disproportionately difficult for small guilds (
still). However, we cannot accurately assess this system yet, as we o
nly have access to 5% of the world.Testing Consideration:
- Since the game is designed for large-scale trade across the full map, we should adjust trade distance multipliers during alpha testing to simulate full-world conditions.
- For example, a trade route from Tropic to Azmeran should be scaled to match what would be a world-spanning trade in the final game.
- This ensures we can properly test risk vs. reward, even within the limited alpha map
.
TL;DR
- Implement a failsafe to prevent caravans from falling through the world.
- Introduce partial item loss instead of full destruction.
- Force flag out of declaration healing, Allow declaration in group
- Increase Trade Bureau discounts (5% is useless).
- Scale trade distance rewards to reflect how global trade will function in the full game.
__________________________________________________________________________
Thoughts:
Right now, economic balance is being tested on an
incomplete system. Fixing
Hunting rarity is the
first priority—without it,
all economy-related data is flawed. Similarly, adjustments to
caravan mechanics and trade incentives should reflect how the
full game world will function, not just the
5% available in alpha.
Without these fixes,
any economy balancing efforts are premature and ineffective.Additional Considerations
I’ve read Steven’s comments regarding
gear power and enchanting being too strong, and I
urge caution in making adjustments before addressing the
larger systemic issues outlined earlier. Once those are fixed, the overall balance will naturally shift.
In reality,
only one aspect of gear truly needs adjustment—penetration. Add a
diminishing returns (DR) scale on penetration as it would allow:
- Consistent PvE balance (assuming mobs have no/low Armor Rating (AR)).
- Increased Time-to-Kill (TTK) in PvP, reducing damage spikes.
- Mitigation to play a meaningful role, counteracting the current stacking effect of penetration and high-tier enchants. (also alot of gear sadly doesnt have raw mitigation... was this a mistake?)
Right now,
penetration + enchanting stacks too effectively, allowing
too much unmitigated damage. Applying
DR to penetration would solve this issue
without requiring a full overhaul of enchanting or altering base damage mechanics.
Potential Enchanting Adjustments
If anything,
enchanting should be adjusted to increase defensive stats—currently,
1 armor or 1 CON is vastly weaker than 1 STR or INT in terms of impact.
Balancing CON & armor values would bring defensive stats in sync with offensive scaling,
without breaking the entire enchanting system.
Unless there’s a
new system planned that makes the current enchanting mechanics a placeholder, a targeted
penetration DR and defensive scaling tweak should be enough to address the concerns.
Closing Thoughts
There are
other topics worth discussing, but I believe these five points are the
most pressing and impactful for the day-to-day player experience. (Glint, PVP zones, Hunting, Caravans & Enchanting/TTK) I’ve deliberately avoided class-specific discussions,
as those require a different level of analysis.
Addressing these core
economic and balancing issues first will ensure any further adjustments are
based on a properly functioning system rather than temporary imbalances.
Also
please Turn on the world bosses & force flag to pvp any one attacking or healing attacker out of party. We bored XD
-PHaRTnONu
