Number of Apartments in a Node

Steven said Apartments are a default building in a node that can have the number of available apartments increased based on the nodes research choices.

My question to the community is do you think apartments (not houses/freeholds) should be limited in number? If not, why? If so, why? What limitations should be put on them?

I feel apartments should be limited by the stage of the node as to emphasize overpopulation/homelessness, prompting those without homes to move to and assist other nodes. But simultaneously, I believe the TOTAL number of all available apartments across all nodes on a server should equal the number of intended players on a server. Allowing for the guarantee of having some form of baseline housing for each player, but not the guarantee of where it will be. Again, this is for apartments, not houses or freeholds.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Dygz

rocsek wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

Apartments are instanced housing.
There will also be open world houses.
There will also be freeholds.

And a bunch of people homeless - which is precisely what Sieges are for.

Wouldn't sieges just make MORE people homeless?

Depends who wins...

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

Apartments are instanced housing.
There will also be open world houses.
There will also be freeholds.

And a bunch of people homeless - which is precisely what Sieges are for.

Well yes, what I was advocating for is to give incentive for people to move to less populated areas for housing vs having to hang out homeless in a tier 6 node. I'd say doing this would promote more sieges since it would spread players out across the world, in theory. If a large portion of the world is guaranteed to be homeless, what nodes would they fight for?

Mag7spy

Dolyem wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

I don't think there should be any limits or ways to stop people from having a place in a node. The limit of taxing cost is enough, the more places you own the more money you are paying.

Trying to make things over realistic needs to have a reason gameplay wise as well. So there would need to be a positive and negative of limited housing, and in such a way where people also can't abuse it.

Then what's stopping everyone from flocking to all of the metropolis nodes? I feel like there needs to be some limit so that players have to spread out and cause conflict. Unless there is a citizenship limit I don't know about.

Most people will go to popular spots, that will also have a price point in itself though, that is just how things work.

But we can't forget about the feeling some people will feel married tot heir own node even if it isn't the highest level. With the vassal system both them get benefits from each other to some degree.

If i had a node I liked a lot I might not relocate my guild to that one since I'd want to grow out own and eventually have it become the top tier.

This still doesn't prevent everyone from moving to one node. Its just hoping people don't. Should there not be a system in place to keep everyone from just moving to the same spot? Price point is one thing that helps gate purchasing apartments in a populated node, but we dont know to what degree it will increase.

No othering prevents everyone going to one node, people have the freedom of choice. It is up tot he systems, and peoples desire for politics that will not have everyone work together. I see casuals going to the best spot for them, while competitive players will move to try to do what they want to win. IT will be a relationship between both types of players deciding where people go to on top of the other points imo.

Wouldnt that still happen with limits to node apartments? I feel like it emphasizes the Node System with competition between nodes to limit their housing as opposed to allowing an entire server to potentially occupy 6 metroplis nodes

WE still need to hear more about nodes and how they work. I don't think we will have a case where everyone is in one node since people will want to build their node up and be the new top dogs.

Also it be pretty lame if your guild couldn't be in a node because of housing being split up or forced out.

The guild splits is definitely a concern.

And while we do need more more info, I am simply going off of the way nodes seem to be designed. That design being to create conflict and competition to constantly try to upgrade your own node and downgrade nodes preventing you from doing so. Its perfectly reasonable to say that if you allow the option for people to just sign up with the best node without a limiter on how many can join, that'd be bad for that sort of competitive system right?

If everyone went carebear and was int he same node it would be boring that is for sure. But i believe competitive players and ones that want to pvp will want to own their own node since it sets you apart. I'm bias but that would be enough for me to move away and fight the other node. I feel other players will be like that as well, wanting to have their own node and run things.

I feel this gets into node talk early when we are waiting on this months stream though lol. I'm speculating but ways to help is add challenges that will both make people happy and unhappy to help with friction. So between buffs node can give, things you can lose if you don't do things right with the node, etc. Which all those things can add friction for players to have them move away or come to your node.

Kilion

If I read the wiki correctly, the nodes system is fully developed, it would give us

5 Metropoli,
10 Cities,
10 Towns,
20 Villages

to a total of 45 Nodes at or above Tier 3 This is within the vassal system so we might have to add the

3x 5 castle nodes which can also reach tier 3
and let's say for good measure 5 tier 3 or above nodes that are independent of the vassal system.

That would give us around 65 +T3 nodes, which would all have at least 50 apartments available, leading to 3250 apaterments. That number is indeed a bit small since Steven has said it should be possible and is the intent that people can own a freehold and an apartment at the same time. So as a mayor of a new village (or higher) there is a HUGE incentive to expand living space to "steal" citizens from other nodes and establish a strong Node based on demographics. While that is indeed something that is possible and provides and interesting political aspect with the number of limited freeholds I could imagine that the player base of some servers will find that number highly insufficient causing frustration more than anything.

Off topic segment

Of course, this "issue" could then be mitigated by the players via a transfer to a server where the current player base is not having high demand for apartments and real estate. And I think there is a chance that this is what will happen:

Ashes has a bunch of systems that are so impactful that some servers could feel like complete trash because players want too much of the same thing while other servers where interests in the game aspects are more diversified are an absolute fantastic place to play on.

That being said: Since the maximum capacity should not ever be reached (as that would mean that nobody is successfully sieging anything) I would hope that expanding on the apartment capacity of a Node is not impairing a Nodes other progression options too much.

daveywavey

If they're too badly limited, then presumably the same people that would get the freeholds first would also be the same people that would get the apartments first. Meaning that there wouldn't be any housing option for anyone playing a little slower or for anyone who joins the game after initial release.

Haven't read the other comments, so someone may have already brought this up....

Fantmx

I think what we are seeing is the majority of a servers players will be homeless and citizenless.

Rovers unite.

Rocsek

So a single person can own 3 homes? You don't have to be a citizen to own a home, but you have to own a home to be a citizen. If that is right something is off with that formula

TheDarkSorcerer

Question, will apartments be instanced?

Fantmx

Yes

Fantmx

rocsek wrote: »

So a single person can own 3 homes? You don't have to be a citizen to own a home, but you have to own a home to be a citizen. If that is right something is off with that formula

That is what they have said. Probably for the real estate possibilities.

Vaknar

Great thought-starter! It will be interesting to see the max population of a server evolving, and how the population spreads out between nodes. Seeing many people interact with the housing systems will provide some valuable insight that I'm excited to see!

Diamaht

I'd say no limits. If over population is an issue than its an issue the players created for themselves.

Overpop in one area creates opportunities in anorher area. Then you have a naturally evolving economy.

Players can then sort themselves out as they choose.

Rocsek

Fantmx wrote: »

rocsek wrote: »

So a single person can own 3 homes? You don't have to be a citizen to own a home, but you have to own a home to be a citizen. If that is right something is off with that formula

That is what they have said. Probably for the real estate possibilities.

Ahh ok. Thinking of it that way makes a bit more sense. Added game loop for people to try and participate in.

daveywavey

Diamaht wrote: »

I'd say no limits. If over population is an issue than its an issue the players created for themselves.

Overpop in one area creates opportunities in anorher area. Then you have a naturally evolving economy.

Players can then sort themselves out as they choose.

Yeah, if there are no restrictions, presumably given time the world will find its natural rhythm.

Diamaht

daveywavey wrote: »

Diamaht wrote: »

I'd say no limits. If over population is an issue than its an issue the players created for themselves.

Overpop in one area creates opportunities in anorher area. Then you have a naturally evolving economy.

Players can then sort themselves out as they choose.

Yeah, if there are no restrictions, presumably given time the world will find its natural rhythm.

It'll be interesting to see where the player hubs form.

It would be nice to see real differences between the servers.

BlackBrony

Diamaht wrote: »

I'd say no limits. If over population is an issue than its an issue the players created for themselves.

Overpop in one area creates opportunities in anorher area. Then you have a naturally evolving economy.

Players can then sort themselves out as they choose.

You can't have overpopulation. At most the overpopulation would be of hardcore players who can afford the citizenship price. Buying an instanced appartment gets more expensive the more people in the node and it also depends if they Mayor decides to build more housing.
So either there are no appartments or the cost is too high.
I presume poor people will live in the edges of the zone of influence of largest node and walk a lot to the main node to sell their certs and materials.

Child Item