Node Level Confusion.

I re-watched both episodes of the Four-Part Node Series from eight years ago yesterday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMvubbX-SHg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44HChA1Kkfk

I did this because, in a recent stream, one of the devs mentioned that Jundark is intended to be a level 50 zone, and that mobs there are currently scaled down for testing purposes.

This raised a major red flag for me. My understanding of the node system was that mobs would scale with the node’s level—not that zones would be permanently locked to specific level ranges.

Introducing static high-level and low-level zones feels like a complete derailment of the game’s core philosophy: that players shape the world. A static level 50 zone doesn’t align with that vision.

I get it—it’s been eight years. Maybe Intrepid has changed its definition of what a node is. But to me, all nodes should begin as level 1–10 areas, and increase by 10-level increments per node stage, up to level 50. That’s what always made sense to me.

If they’re moving toward static level zones, I don’t like it. Mid- and low-level nodes would never be able to compete with endgame zones in terms of relevance or player engagement.

Am I wrong? Did the dev misspeak?

What’s actually real here?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

ShaggyRyn

I couldn’t agree more. I’m pretty sure they are still planning to have areas change level but I’m unsure if this has been talked about in awhile. I would assume that is still the plan though because the world would have nodes that are empty once players level past the mobs in that area.

daveywavey

Yeah, it's an odd move, for sure.

Ludullu

Yep, I've been commenting on that ever since that stream. We better not have moved away from that design, otherwise there's literally 0 fucking point in Nodes. We'd just be back to themepark bs, with all of its disadvantages.

Azherae

I'd assume they meant for 'during Alpha Testing'.

If we only have one Divine Gateway at the moment and they're testing progression paths, it would make sense. Our lack of other Gateways wouldn't represent the final ideal either, so it wouldn't be weird to build a progression 'from Gateway Outward' during this time.

ShaggyRyn

Azherae wrote: »

I'd assume they meant for 'during Alpha Testing'.

If we only have one Divine Gateway at the moment and they're testing progression paths, it would make sense. Our lack of other Gateways wouldn't represent the final ideal either, so it wouldn't be weird to build a progression 'from Gateway Outward' during this time.

I agree! This probably is just going to be a high level zone for testing. I would assume once they get the dynamic mob spawns online it will change what level everything is.

But here is a question…. Is the whole world going to be low level mobs till you level the nodes up? This seems like a pain too if you level in one area and then want to travel to a more secluded node then need to level all that zone up as well.

Ludullu

ShaggyRyn wrote: »

But here is a question…. Is the whole world going to be low level mobs till you level the nodes up? This seems like a pain too if you level in one area and then want to travel to a more secluded node then need to level all that zone up as well.

That's the entire appeal though. Your own actions have direct impact on the world around you. It's one of the reason I got interested in the game in the first place.

Vhaeyne

Azherae wrote: »

I'd assume they meant for 'during Alpha Testing'.

I'm honestly sick of dealing with assumptions.

In this case, it's a big deal because, at best, they're temporarily developing the game in a direction that makes me less interested in the project—and at worst, they're permanently destroying the appeal of the node system.

Birqa

push

valid concern!
i want a dev that can answer that question to do it pls.

Grabba_the_Butt

This is my biggest concern as well. We've gone from not having x level zones to this zone is specifically a level 50 area. That defeats the purpose of using strategy to build up a world based upon your needs and would leave every server being built from the start practically the same.

Some naval/pirate based guilds might want a large city by the sea
Some pve players might want a want a specific dungeon or raid boss unlocked
Some pvp players might want a military node to be a level 6, especially if it is in a region near a castle.

There is enough personal desires already to have node conflicts. We don't need it forced upon us by limiting where people are allowed to make their home

Is this another one of Steven's constant need to put conflict into everything? Is this driving the notion that the starting area nodes in the Riverlands must be sacked first before Jundark can even be built?

As Op pointed out, the Jundark nodes will never be able to compete with the rest of the world. Because of the Vasseling system, a lot of nodes will have to crumble before you ever see a level 5 or 6 node in the Jundark. Again, that's unnatural forced conflict and not organic player-driven conflict.

I'm tired of the constant drive to make everything have conflict when conflict will happen regardless based upon the needs and desires of the players on the server. We don't need forced conflict in every designed system.

Enigmatic Sage

@Vhaeyne you're clearly living up to the name for producing results

Vhaeyne

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

@Vhaeyne you're clearly living up to the name for producing results

Yeah…

I have noticed an uptick in developer responses on the forums. Maybe things aren’t as in vain as they used to be.

Imanek

I'm going to bring this topic back up as well, since it seems quite important—this looks like a major shift. Between the original project and the latest livestreams, things have become pretty unclear. It would be really helpful to get a clear explanation: is this change only for the Alpha, or is it meant to be permanent?

Vhaeyne

Imanek wrote: »

I'm going to bring this topic back up as well, since it seems quite important—this looks like a major shift. Between the original project and the latest livestreams, things have become pretty unclear. It would be really helpful to get a clear explanation: is this change only for the Alpha, or is it meant to be permanent?

Thank you for the bump. I am hopeful we get some detailed clarification on this soon. Maybe today in the Q&A for the live stream?

ShaggyRyn

Bump! I want clarification on this. I’m ok if this currently isn’t in and they are just testing mob levels but will we be getting nodes with set levels or the original design idea where the area of influence mobs level change with the node level

Undead Canuck

As people have mentioned, this is testing. Any kind of static dungeon will have a certain level range (in this case, they may have been sloppy and said Jundark instead of a certain area of Jundark). Also, since we haven't seen all the charactor or node levels yet, they are setting some static instead of dynamic for the testing.

Did they mean the Jundark node (there are probably more than one), or zone? I think it is more important that the define what they mean by node / zone / area when they mention these things.

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Zones_and_progression
On the Wiki from Steven:
We don’t have a strictly level 25 zone. Instead, that zone might have some level 10 creatures near the road, some level 20 creatures deep in the forest, and some level 30 creatures up the mountain. These ratios will change based on the Nodes that inform them, becoming generally more dangerous as the Node grows. All this civilization attracts the attention of Things-That-Should-Not-Be. This does not mean that wilderness areas are safe, by any means. Some may be safe-er, but all will have dangers that even the most experienced traveler needs to watch out for.[6] – Steven Sharif

ShaggyRyn

Undead Canuck wrote: »

As people have mentioned, this is testing. Any kind of static dungeon will have a certain level range (in this case, they may have been sloppy and said Jundark instead of a certain area of Jundark). Also, since we haven't seen all the charactor or node levels yet, they are setting some static instead of dynamic for the testing.

Did they mean the Jundark node (there are probably more than one), or zone? I think it is more important that the define what they mean by node / zone / area when they mention these things.

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Zones_and_progression
On the Wiki from Steven:
We don’t have a strictly level 25 zone. Instead, that zone might have some level 10 creatures near the road, some level 20 creatures deep in the forest, and some level 30 creatures up the mountain. These ratios will change based on the Nodes that inform them, becoming generally more dangerous as the Node grows. All this civilization attracts the attention of Things-That-Should-Not-Be. This does not mean that wilderness areas are safe, by any means. Some may be safe-er, but all will have dangers that even the most experienced traveler needs to watch out for.[6] – Steven Sharif

I think you are right I just want to confirm lol. The wiki still saying that does give me hope.

Laetitian

I think it could be okay if they have a few (Let's say 4) nodes anchored as "special" and inherently high-level, to give them an anchor for story arcs with special unique locations.
It would be a slight let-down compared to a completely fluid map, but as long as the rest of the map can still shape flexibly and become important as more players go there, it might be an acceptable trade-off between design-feasibility, unique quest-influenced story locations, and player-impact.

I'd prefer it if everything was player-influenced, but this counter-example is roughly the limit of compromise I'd be willing to deal with.
They could also announce it to be temporary for the first 1-3 years after publishing, if they maintain the modular framework as the basis of the system, and work on making the system even more flexible once the game releases.

That said, if they just give up on node levelling shaping the world (in ways that reshape where different kinds of gameplay happen), I'd be kinda done with the game, and I hope they understand that that's not a compromise they can make. Find another investor instead, if that's the limiting factor; abandoning your promises is not an option.

Vhaeyne

Laetitian wrote: »

I think it could be okay if they have a few (Let's say 4) nodes anchored as "special" and inherently high-level, to give them an anchor for story arcs with special unique locations.
It would be a slight let-down compared to a completely fluid map, but as long as the rest of the map can still shape flexibly and become important as more players go there, it might be an acceptable trade-off between design-feasibility, unique quest-influenced story locations, and player-impact.

I'd prefer it if everything was player-influenced, but this counter-example is roughly the limit of compromise I'd be willing to deal with.
They could also announce it to be temporary for the first 1-3 years after publishing, if they maintain the modular framework as the basis of the system, and work on making the system even more flexible once the game releases.

That said, if they just give up on node levelling shaping the world (in ways that reshape where different kinds of gameplay happen), I'd be kinda done with the game, and I hope they understand that that's not a compromise they can make. Find another investor instead, if that's the limiting factor; abandoning your promises is not an option.

If the nodes aren’t equally compelling, then the vision of a player-driven world across multiple servers risks falling apart before it even begins.

Players naturally gravitate toward optimal choices. If certain nodes are inherently better—whether due to location, resources, or narrative significance—they’ll become the obvious picks, and the rest may end up largely ignored. At that point, it’s no longer about meaningful player choice—it’s about the meta.

If there are plans to anchor specific nodes, I hope the team considers ways to balance that carefully—perhaps through resource scarcity, increased development costs, or other trade-offs—to preserve the broader vision.

That said, I’d personally prefer to see all zones designed with equal potential. I understand it’s a significant amount of work, but so was designing unique outfits for every race. That commitment to extra effort “to make the game better” is part of what sets this project apart—and I think ensuring a fair and flexible node system is even more crucial to its long-term success.

ELWOW

What a stupid idea to have 1-10 mobs everywhere and progress with node levels. By this way starting zones will become end game zones because every new player and like most players will level up starting zones. Then who will want to go to some furthest zone and level it up for weeks or months just to see what endgame will it offer? In the same time other guilds will try to destroy these nodes just because it will colide with theirs on other zone border.
There has to be some level design for zones, closer zones to the starting points should be early zones with some high level dungeons/zones (if nodes are leveled up) and the further one can be more challenging. The point is that nodes should unlock some additional dungeons/spots/routes, not just purely change level of some goblins or plants or undeads. I don't find game exciting if it will just change mob levels in Remnants of Sephilon. Instead it should unlock some mausoleum or crypt that is mini dungeon with much better mobs. That should be the way intrepid should take.
Jundark should be higher level zone, but not max level zone. It should contain mobs like 15-30 and if some nodes level up it should also have some 30-50 mobs in these unlocked areas. I don't like the idea that most of the world is open for us (or at least for Alpha). It should have more smaller spots for 1-4 people and the bigger zones like Oakenbane Keep or Tower of Carphine should be either story arc open for 1-2 days or opened when some nodes level up to level 3-4+.
For now we got huge zones but barely any interesting spots to farm. Riverlands have like 7-8 decent spots to group up for, with this map size there should be waaaay more options. I don't like the idea that the only decent group content are the PoI's. You won't find anything besides these PoI's on the map.

You keep bringing player driven world argument, but what is the point of making player driven goblins level 40 or 50 instead of level 10? Higher level content shouldn't be on the open space, especially on these early zones. You want new players to find out that close to Winstead there are 50 level ravens one shotting everyone? Will you farm these ravens? Probably no, so whats the point of doing such things? Leveled up Winstead should open some new options for Citadel of the Steel Bloom or some new dungeon/spots north of the city.
There is no point to make Jundark level 1-10 if you can easily make these first 10-20 levels in both Riverlands and Desert. These zones are designed to be starting routes and it should stay like that.
Every node should have like 2-3 options to upgrade some specific PoI's or unlock completely new ones that are not seen on the map. That will still be huge player driven choices, but not game breaking for newer people. On top of that map indicators should be more in-depth and we should see some visible changes to these PoI markers that there is something special to explore. No one will run to every spot just to see if something opened up every time node level up. That's just my opinion.

Vhaeyne

@ELWOW

You're always welcome to your opinion, but I think there may be a few misunderstandings about what I’m saying.

There are already starting zones—Lion’s Hold, the Anvils (coming soon), and more. These areas act as static, low-level nodes. They’re not very large, but they’re enough to get players to the point where they can handle level 10 mobs near the roads in active nodes.

I don't think that most goblins would just remain goblins and scale up in level. The design was that goblins would be replaced by stronger enemies—like trolls or ogres—as nodes level up. This was part of the original design intent. If you’re curious, I recommend watching the two videos from the “Four-Part Node Series.”

To my knowledge no one is asking for level 50 ravens one-shotting players in town. The intended idea is that stronger mobs would appear the farther you venture from roads and towns. And honestly, regular overworld mobs aren’t even the central concern—they could stay low-level near towns and roads. What matters more is that points of interest (POIs) and Underrealm content scale appropriately. Keeping overworld mobs low-level around major travel paths would actually be a good thing—it helps low-level players progress and settle in any node.

When I bring up a "player-driven world," it’s not meant as a debating point—it is the core selling point of this game. There are plenty of more complete MMORPGs without player-driven worlds already on the market. What sets Ashes of Creation apart is that promise. Without it, Ashes risks becoming just another forgettable Kickstarter MMO.

Child Item