So, what do you think about sieges forced friend-mode and capped to adlvl 80 in r63?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dhanas, Feb 26, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dhanas

    Dhanas Avatar

    Messages:
    562
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    63
    They know there was a content that was multiplayer only, and they saw a hope for that game, they were bored to grind over and over the same thing in friend mode, and having to compete for resource given them something new and exciting to do which drove them back to the game.

    They are many ppl and not just the people kaeshiva was complaining about.

    The motivation is they were bored to play just friend mode, for different motivations
    1st If there isn't any competition for resources price of resources will always drop, like it happened with gold/silver and every mined resource
    2nd They were bored to play trivial content in friend mode and they wanted something new and exciting added to their regular gameplay
    3rd Having sieges multiplayer only forced them to make groups for clean it faster, since other ppl probably could pop in and try to compete with them

    So yes, this is a game and many ppl like misure themselves with others, this doesn't involve griefin or harassing, but simply generate fun game mechanics which generate competition between players.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
    Boris Mondragon and Spinok like this.
  2. Armeleon Vesaz

    Armeleon Vesaz Avatar

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    379
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Finland
    I don't really care much if they keep the current match making or revert it back. Both have its' perks for different people and I can see both sides. The level cap feels like a pointless punish to those of us who'v been around a long time. If level capping PVE zones becomes a trend, it'd certainly ruin the game for me.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  3. Vladamir Begemot

    Vladamir Begemot Avatar

    Messages:
    6,194
    Likes Received:
    12,076
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Gotcha. Interesting development. It's all very interesting. I don't know any answers (except I need a bigger Elven Globe home), but it's sure all over the place today!
     
    Boris Mondragon and Dhanas like this.
  4. Tailz

    Tailz Avatar

    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Bringing players back to the game and making it interesting for new players would require less constant, and often times unannounced changes, fixing known bugs and adding long standing requests by the community. Further more, some monthly or tri monthly surveys to get feedback from the majority of players, not the minority. I don't have all the answers, but this would be an excellent starting point.
     
  5. kaeshiva

    kaeshiva Avatar

    Messages:
    3,054
    Likes Received:
    11,752
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Female
    Agree.
    There are valid reasons to have open sieges
    There are valid reasons to have private sieges
    This is why the ability to choose your preference worked well since, well, the implementation of sieges.
    But it seems like most people agree the levelcapping is not good.
     
  6. Black Tortoise

    Black Tortoise Avatar

    Messages:
    1,961
    Likes Received:
    3,655
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Storm's Reach
    Right, and the message overall, concerning "level caps" in the first place, or my alternative suggestion of scaling the difficulty, is to avoid a situation where higher level players can generate asymmetrical amounts of gold / resources with little resistance.

    In other words, the "message" from these mechanics is, "this is for mid-high level players, not extreme level players, and its not meant to be farmed for economic gain"
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2019
  7. Gia2

    Gia2 Avatar

    Messages:
    358
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    [​IMG]


    Typical triangle of prime mats made simple
    Either way, somehow, somewhere, you have to deal with inflaction of grinded items if you aim to preserve the value per se of items dropped.
    Acting on the Zone Access is not goin to lead anywhere and have only counterproductive effect in the mid term.
    Not to mention that this engine can provide only small istanced zones.
    I feel extremely Juvenile the tendency of so called casual gamers (which probably play more time than many competitive ones) to have exclusive ways of farming without dealing with other people.
    You cannot have an unlimited, exclusive and safe way to collect things without dealing with others people presence and then aim for a sane and working economy.
    If economy is based on trades between human entities it's mandatory to forse them to behave in the same geographic game zone.
    In the end, I have never understood the sociopathism under the statement.
    I think this comes from other mmorpgs burned players that got kicked out from communities or simply cant stand a valid and sane and simplistic multiplayer game.
    - my exclusive zone
    - my exclusive time
    - our global economy
    You want others money? Deal with open zones or made dropped stuff not tradeable
    Ps: the only issue here, as always, is the ancestral KS manifesto where everything were advertized and no one can redefine
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2019
  8. FrostII

    FrostII Bug Hunter

    Messages:
    5,884
    Likes Received:
    11,033
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    This ^^^^^ exactly.
    Personally, I haven't spent over 12k hrs in SotA enduring crappy loot, death decay, and more crappy loot - to build a char so he can be level cap'd.
    No thx.......
     
  9. Gia2

    Gia2 Avatar

    Messages:
    358
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    160 passive archery raised for nothing here
     
    FrostII and Mishikal like this.
  10. Rixa Ultima

    Rixa Ultima Avatar

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    8
    <3
     
  11. ErikRulez

    ErikRulez Avatar

    Messages:
    647
    Likes Received:
    1,179
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Isn't every adventure scene in open mode essentially competitive for resources? Is the difference that players showed up to the sieges more often?
     
  12. Armeleon Vesaz

    Armeleon Vesaz Avatar

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    379
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Finland
    The difference is that the current iteration for matchmaking only has a multiplayer so there is forced multiplayer.
     
    Mishikal and Dhanas like this.
  13. Weins201

    Weins201 Avatar

    Messages:
    7,121
    Likes Received:
    10,958
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Notice the thread has TWO issues Match Making - this is fixed to allow SPO and FO after some players got Hijacked by jerks. Such is life of multiplayer game,

    Again this is FIXED with SPO and FO

    The Second Issue whish apeared out fo nowhere is the 80/100 caps.

    Not one person here know why this was even thought of, and if you look at it only 1 or 2 even have some kind of argument that could support it. all guesswork to dream up some excuse but nothign that has any validity.

    Skills caps have to be the worst idea ever even dreamed up even worse that Decay. BTW Decya actually worked , just not liked.
     
    Mishikal and Cyin like this.
  14. ErikRulez

    ErikRulez Avatar

    Messages:
    647
    Likes Received:
    1,179
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Here is the problem as I see it. If something is going to be a competition, it should be presented that way from the start. Since sieges didn't start out as exclusively competitive, switching them to open multiplayer and then assuming that it is acceptable to treat every siege instance as a competitive race to get the most/all resources is not going to be looked at favorably by all players. Many will treat these like first come first served instances and will take issue when someone else or another group comes in and starts to take resources from an instance they are already working. Especially since there are so many active sieges. They will look upon this as rude, "cutting in line" or griefing. While I can see the point that one can interpret that all open multiplayer scenes are a competition for resources, you yourself say that you go to these because players are forced into the situation. Any time a player is forced into a situation they would normally avoid because they don't find it enjoyable, they are not going to like it. SOTA is a game, it is supposed to be enjoyable for all who play it.

    That said, if Port introduced a new siege type where having a race for resources is the goal of the siege (pve or pvp) and all parties know it is a race going in then there would be no real reason for hurt feelings( in theory ). In fact, a pve race for resources that pops up every now and then where the resource nodes/loot is more rewarding than normal sounds pretty fun to me. A pvp version would probably appeal to the pvpers as well.
     
    Boris Mondragon, oplek and kaeshiva like this.
  15. Spungwa

    Spungwa Avatar

    Messages:
    607
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Trophy Points:
    93
    The economy thing is a bit off topic, but i understand why it is being brought up, they want competition in supply.

    However -

    Not true, this is ONLY true if the player time supply of farming the item is greater than the demand.
    The most abundant item in Eve online (which has probably the best player driven economy of any game ever) is titanium. It is available EVERYWHERE and respawn every 24 hours, can be farmed in conplete safety if you know what you are doing (and are not AFK), even with non-consensual PvP. Even if every character in the game farmed titanium for that 24 hours they would never deplete the supply. So you can run an economy on the function that is only dependent on player time. That is just one example, there is a reason Eve had a third party tool called IPH (Isk Per Hour - isk being the in game currency). Because the limiting factor is player time and therefore doing what you are best at that gives the most isk per hour is your most efficient way (from an economy point of view) to play.

    If there is continual (not one off) and enough demand that the player time is still the limiting supply to below demand, then there is no problem.


    Regards
    Spung
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2019
  16. sotasota4

    sotasota4 Avatar

    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nižnij Novgorod
    Not true at all )) this is what I call falsehood with the aid of fitting examples ---
    More players competing for resources means less resources for every player, FAIR --- A single player with all resources for him means endless resources for that player based on time spend in the scene, BAD )
    challenge you to go and farm dolus in open multiplayer without anyone coming to compete for the loot
    What single players want to do is just overfarm sieges to get more cabalists loots as possbile without having to compete or share them with others (

    SOLUTION is cut resources and experience points in private mode -- in this way only those who need this will go there and not to look for economic advantage --

    I have read the promises of kickstarter, someone can show me where portalarium said private mode and open mode must have the same loots and experience rate?
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2019
    Boris Mondragon and Gia2 like this.
  17. Dhanas

    Dhanas Avatar

    Messages:
    562
    Likes Received:
    1,033
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You can't compete with people farming the same zone in friend mode, they will be always advantaged cause they don't have to compete. Let me explain it with an example:
    Let's suppose there is a map with 10 gold ore node
    Player A goes in friend mode and gather all the 10 gold ore node, no one can bother him or steal his resources so can gather all the 10 nodes
    Player B goes in multiplayer mode, being a multiplayer zone also Player C shows up, so they have 10 gold ore nod to divide in 2, let's suppose player B gather 5 node and player C other 5
    Player D goes in multiplayer PVP mode, he has same problem of player B and C cause he has to share resources with other ppl in the same map, and he can probably find Player E (flagged PVP) which attack Player D and steal his ransoms, or simply slow down Player D and Player B and C can gather all the nod resources while Player D and Player E are fighting.

    At the end of the day Player A is the one who gain more resources from his time spent in the zone, and everyone will be discouraged to play like player B, C, D.

    So in my opinion there isn't any competition in the game since there is friend mode with same drop rate of multiplayer mode, it should be fair if player A in friend mode had just 5 node to gather, while player B and C in multiplayer mode have 10 node to gather, at the same time Player D who is in multiplayer and flagged PVP, should have an increased drop rate compared to player B, C and A because he has double penality ( sharing resources with others and risk to be killed and looted ).
     
  18. Spungwa

    Spungwa Avatar

    Messages:
    607
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think you misunderstand my post.
    I was not saying there was no competition in supply in this game. I was pointing out that the statement

    If economy is based on trades between human entities it's mandatory to forse them to behave in the same geographic game zone.

    is not true, depends how you design your economy. As infinite supply by the game system does not necessarily mean it can not be part of a player driven economy. As long as the demand exists and high enough and it takes enough player time to exploit that system supply then player time can still be the limiting factor keeping the supply below demand.

    Eve does this for most resources, another example off the top of my head, missions (resource is loyalty points) can be spawn on demand by the player. No limit in the system supply, yet those loyalty points can be turned in for items that have demand and are therefore part of a player driven economy.


    Regards
    Spung
     
  19. Mishikal

    Mishikal Avatar

    Messages:
    1,965
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Brittany Estates
    Which is exactly what WoW does these days (All ore nodes, etc, have multiple instances, so you aren't competing with other players when harvesting them. And yet the economy on WoW is strong and there is an ongoing demand for the various ores, etc.
     
  20. Gia2

    Gia2 Avatar

    Messages:
    358
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm goin to bring you back to reality where players are roughly 300 instead of thousands and thousands like EVE.
    A sunday cup vs the first League
    A church core vs The berliner


    EVE titanium esempio doesnt fit at all. LOL. Istanced vs open universe always flagged situation? Orly?
    (Played EVE as well, and if you do you know why and how it gets sunk there. OT: keywords: open universe, pvp everywhere, engage possibilities, ships costs and so on
    Things goin to be restricted in a way or another. Competition among players is the good old rule in every game. This little garden promised black roses to big fishes in a slow pace paradise. Exclusive farming map aint goin to work at all.

    Do you notice that the ridicolius decay speed of worn weapons (unlike wands) is the reason of the extreme inflaction of prime mats?
    1 bow per week to make happy the 24/7 crafters and multi acc miners? This is plain straight to everyone.. right?
    Put back a solid decay and CUT the resource gathering. People avoid games where they are forced to maintain the gear over and over and that become the only reason to play. I guess this is pretty straight and simple but feel like obly few stupid people (like me) understand these methods


    Agree. But you wont get listen by people who only want to preserve their green garden. This forums has years and billions of billions of word but any straight plan never came out from.

    I like your post and will second you only if my interests are close to yours, no matter if the game itself is goin to stuck in the mud. I will be happy with my garden in the mud
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2019
    TheGrinch and Dhanas like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.