Albion Online Roadmap & Vision Update

    • Archiemedis wrote:

      Your argumentative showdown is out of touch with what is considered an observation
      Well you didn't really come off as "having an observation" - you sounded like you were presenting hard facts. Hence my clamor yo your whole post.
      If you merely have an opinion - its Ok, we can all move on, we all have opinions about one thing or another, what color of shoes we prefer, etc...

      Archiemedis wrote:

      I state things that happened and do not lie. My oppinion is my own, but if you declare them as "lies", you are a manipulative piece of schmidt and that would actually fit perfectly with your name, in my oppinion. So you have a choice here;
      I have a choice to not call out people's opinions, and Im fine with that. However opinions that do not have facts, but are presented as such - yes those I will call out as "lies". Some people more on the "soft side" prefer to hear or say something like "not true" or "you are not saying the truth" - but its all interchangeable with the word "lies". At the end of the day you are presenting facts without any evidence, and it does not matter if someone calls it "not true" or "a lie" - its all the same.

      Unless of course you are just sharing your opinion on the color of t7 gear (should it really be yellow?) or opinion on game population, yeah, there is nothing "untruthful" in having an opinion...

      Archiemedis wrote:

      Either you suck it up and keep civil or you leave the discussion and stop calling out people.
      Again, I will call people out when they present opinions as facts, and if those facts are "baseless" (have no evidence provided to back them up). If you have an opinion - its Ok. My opinion is that you can have an opinion ;)

      Archiemedis wrote:

      Albion Online's business model can achieve the same and probably more income by enabling cosmetic mtx and disabling multiple premium alts
      I'll agree with you on having more cosmetics = potentially achieve more income (altho EVE Online's model kind of proves otherwise - they did not invest into their "skin" shop for a while, like 5+ yrs, and its barely paying off).

      But I disagree on the "disabling alts" comment. Its mathematically (and economically) incorrect. Its like saying "if government lowers taxes - their revenue will go up", which we all know is not true, at least at face value.

      Archiemedis wrote:

      The observations are the following:

      - Causal United (big beta guild, 2 members on roundtable total, 300+ members, took no tax and allowed any playstyle) bled more than 95% of it's members, when alt + LP mechanics were introduced.
      Again, is this facts or just observation/opinion tailored to your agenda? Because if this is facts - I'd like to see some. Maybe they just quit because the map changed? A lot of things were tossed and changed throughout the beta (another undeniable fact, right?) - so its very possible that various people were quitting for various reason, not just because of one reason "x", as you make it out to be.


      And finally even if you were somehow "magically" able to provide facts (which would require screenshots of conversatons with time-stamps and access to SBI's player DB to see at which point in time which players stopped playing) that "addition of alts made 300 people quit) - this does not really mean much. 300 out of 8000 (saddle point) or current 40k+ players is just too little. And things and business models change all the time. Who is to say that "losing 300 players in order to gain another 8000-40,000" is bad? Or that adding alts, which on avg can increase revenue by 30% is worse then losing 300 players? (if 30% total revenue > loss from 300 quitting - its justified).

      See what I did there? There are just so many factors here... and stating that "X number of players quit" just because of 1 of these factors (especially in deep beta 3-4 yrs ago?) I dont know.... not buying it really...
    • I talked to a lot of people and got the same feedback = the loss of roles diminished fun and created a mandatory situation which was not considered fun




      Okay. Educational system is not considered "fun" by a bunch of people I talked to... so what? We still have to go through it if we want a decently paying job.

      Refining your materials in game is "not considered fun" or grinding same mobs over and over...

      Also the situation with alts is not really "mandatory" - no need to overdramaticize it. Everyone has a choice, right? (just like a system with education IRL - its not mandatory right? and you can drop out or choose not to attend school/college - nobody is forcing you, right?) Latter is a trick question btw...


      Further more, throughout my forum activity, you can see the one big thread in my sig that ended in Korn shutting down any constructive feedback with very short answers which did not suffice at all




      I remember vaguely reading that thread, but I dont have time for a refresher. Because frankly - alts are here to stay. Not to mention that the entire argument against "alts" can get squashed by the fact that people can just get multiple accounts (at the same price as alts really)... so there is not much of a difference. This is what old school MMOs used to be, where you could only have 1 character per account - people got multiple accounts... this is not news - this has been going on in MMOs for the past 20+ yrs.

      Albion decided not to reinvent the wheel, and just keep alts in (plus this is what EVE Online did, and Albion wanted to copy their very successful business model, and so they did)


      Every time people get past T4 and are being pushed into PvP, the majority leaves the game. This is reflected in a) experience and feedback from beta and b) player numbers going down to a saddle point which promted the steam sale and then the f2p version.




      Again - this is a "lie", "not truth" (same as lie) or just an "opinion"? The players leaving past T4 part that is. I know that over 150,000-200,000 players have tried the game and over 90% have eventually (eventually is the key word) left, but now we are back up to about 40,000, which is about 20% of the total 200,000 (and even those numbers are a bit made up, I remember SBI posting some statistic that over 150,000 founder packs were sold in 2017).

      And players leaving and the game "reaching" a saddle point has nothing to do with "players quit after hitting t4 and getting into PVP" - like that is the most far fetched correlation I've ever seen. Yes - for many, PVP is just not a thing. You know how many players leave other PVP games (like the very praised EVE Online) or Rust? Because its just not their cup of tea. People leaving a PVP game has nothing to do with t4 and alt.

      To further rebut your argument - majority of my friends (and 90% of ppl on my friends list ingame no longer play, but I have a big list) have quiot at or after hitting T8 in one or more disciplines. I've quit myself multiple times, and I've been T8 since like month 4 after launch. Tier has nothing to do with people quitting is what Im saying... potential exposure to PVP, maybe yes - but thats normal for a PVP oriented game.
      SBI knew what they getting themselves in, otherwise they would not have copied EVE - they would instead have copied "Hello Kitty Online" and called it "Albion Farmville" or something...


      The T4 bleeding specifically happened because people told me, they enjoyed being a supportive role but did not want to PvP at all and or wanted to stay on the royal continent in hopes for a future update (solo players ...)




      We are all waiting for a solo upgrade, myself included. But people can still stay in supportive roles... its not recommended, as you'd be shutting yourself out of maybe 60-70% of content... so why play a game where you only experience 30% of content? Its a nobrainer why they left.

      The attractiveness of Albion should come in the "overall package" that it delivers. I can do farming and gathering and market PVP and can do a 5v5 MOBA style combat in HGs or GvGs - and I can do all that on one platform called Albion Online. That is the whole point. Don't come into Starbucks asking for a cup of plain water and then complain that you don't like it and you don't understand what is all the fuss about! You come into Starbucks for the entire experience...

      I used to yell at my younger siblings (when we were younger) who would come in with me and family to a fancy restaurant and order like chicken nuggets and fries. Im like - OMG you can get that crap at a fast food joint or even microwave it at home - the whole point in this place is to try the fancy stuff!

      Same thing goes for Albion - the whole point is that you can do everything. If you only want to "trade the market" or "only craft" - yes you can, but you gotta try the other stuff too. I personally do it all (as my Youtube channel, which is still growing - can attest to). I do market PVP, crafting, solo PVP, RDG runs, Arenas, like you name it - and I'll be doing it (except ZvZ and GvG, but I've done a little of ZvZ before and my only issue is the technical limitation of the game engine, not necessarily dislike of the activity)


      As i stated multiple times over and over again: PvP can not be the main engine behind player numbers in Albion and it was not marketed as such in the past.




      To this I will "withhold" my opinion, because I dont have all the facts as to how the game 'was" (keyword - was) marketed in the past. I know that in the present its an open world Sandbox PVP MMO where you can do anything, and even better if you do it all (a little here and there). The numbers in Albion should be driven from both PVP and PVE activities alike - and that is my opinion.


      So at anyone who thinks things are fine and feedback like this is either a "lie" or just another person in the wrong game: you are not helping at all. You are the reason why other players do not want to become active in here due to bad energy from guys like you.




      I just have a problem with people looking at things out of context, or sharing their "opinion" as a hard fact. If you think of ways on how to improve PVE (because you think that will drive up the player numbers, and I don't disagree btw) - feel free to post that in the suggestion forums. I also believe you have suggested a bunch of things in the past, and couple of them have been slowly coming to fruition - and that should be a good thing, no?

      EDIT: forum screwed me with 2000 char limit so I had to copy-paste out and reply in 2 separate posts, by which time you deleted/edited your post. So your quotes are gone (but I highlited and bolded them)
    • Archiemedis wrote:

      This has lead and still leads to the bleeding of players, who are not mainly doing pvp or pve, as it cuts roles, destroys professions, shifts markets and ultimately is a curse for the game, imo.
      Last word in this sentence marks the whole content as personal opinion.

      Captainrussia wrote:

      you sounded like you were presenting hard facts
      You interpreted that as hard fact and called me a lier. Shame is on you here

      Captainrussia wrote:

      Again, I will call people out when they present opinions as facts
      That is generally OK to do, but in this case you jumped the gun.

      Captainrussia wrote:

      But I disagree on the "disabling alts" comment. Its mathematically (and economically) incorrect. Its like saying "if government lowers taxes - their revenue will go up", which we all know is not true, at least at face value.
      If you are interested in a discussion, read the sig thread. There was a promise for a "one character only" rule from SI form alpha. If you still think alt characters are not a problem due to maths, i cannot convince you. But the main argument here is that less players overall would have slave alt accounts if alts were removed. It is a FACT, that people i played with left the game due to the shift in self sufficient roles. It is a FACT, that duplicated roles destroy game play opportunities in a market driven game.
      While it is also correct to ASSUME that after years, a lot of people would have mastered certain skills, so that the "no alt rule" would effectively (maybe) become obsolete, it is also correct to COUNTER ASSUME that not everyone will be active and or playing = a circle of active characters will likely occur. This is extremely simplified with alts, as they offer nearly endless options for one player to do everything and thus dodging other players main game play loop.

      Numbers are related to the pool size; when i say 300 people left, that is a lot of testers. When i say "i talked to them", i mean i wrote to them in chat and specifically asked them about why they are leaving. So while you can turn this around all you want, it is a personal interview. Generally you could twist every single word from every forum user, by saying "he has no hard proof". Player numbers are a hard proof. And things that did not change are alt characters, solo content (missing) and thinly designed game play styles other than PvP and maybe PvE (still weak).
      It is only logical to ASSUME that these areas are bleeding player numbers. You may proof me wrong if you bring me hard facts...
    • Captainrussia wrote:

      Okay. Educational system is not considered "fun" by a bunch of people I talked to... so what? We still have to go through it if we want a decently paying job.
      The educational system is not actually good but generally, this argument is failing to impress due to the nature of games.

      Captainrussia wrote:

      Also the situation with alts is not really "mandatory"
      Oh, it is. If it was not, SI would have followed their own "one character rule". Read up Omnio's comment (number 205) in the sig thread.

      Captainrussia wrote:

      And players leaving and the game "reaching" a saddle point has nothing to do with "players quit after hitting t4 and getting into PVP"
      This is an assumption based on the interviews i had and from leftover players trying out the launch game and giving me the same feedback. The "saddle point" is in every game, it is more abour how easily a company can twist this by saying for example: "We anticipated that outcome" or "This is the number we expected and are keen on keeping". When the same problematic areas exist throughout multiple testing phases, then it is OK to assume that they are at least partly the cause.

      Captainrussia wrote:

      If you think of ways on how to improve PVE (because you think that will drive up the player numbers, and I don't disagree btw) - feel free to post that in the suggestion forums. I also believe you have suggested a bunch of things in the past, and couple of them have been slowly coming to fruition - and that should be a good thing, no?
      Here are the things i called out missing or presented as feedback idea:
      • Gatherer Gear (made it into the game)
      • Dungeons for Gatherers and Crafters (may follow)
      • T8 resources need to be outside of territories (i think this has been changed - i was not active in that time)
      • Caerleon Black Market needs to be put into every city capped at T5 (no comment on that one)
      • Caerleon as hub diminishes outer cities (proven right, outer cities got faction system to make them more attractive)
      • New ways how gathering should work (was at least discussed, but did not make it)
      • Gatherer artifacts and gear scaling up against elementals (?)
      • Gatherer Tools as weapons to push GvE game play
      • Roaming mobs (SI did that poorly, intention was to have them become an active force (PvE))
      • Guild contracts (?)
      • Guild roles - Dedicated in game decision that yields bonus skills or % on market tax or silver income = Group up with a gatherer guild member, get certain buffs etc. (?)
      • Movement speed of mounts (made it)
      • Throwing weapon thinktank - Because they were present in alpha and got removed, i gave feedback on how artifacts can be designed (?)
      • Farming skill lines (?)
      • Mobs not spawning with max silver (was abused heavily at every test launch) - (done)
      • Chests not being so weak that players can open them with a few hits (done)
      • Not pushing gatherers into hot spots to be PvP targets (even more) - (did the opposite)
      • Giving the spear line a counter (done)
      • Revert crafting weapons back to single lines instead of weapon family (kept it)
      • Allowing Ox and horse meat to be used as food (?)
      • Seasons which influence crop yield and mob density (?)
      • Hide mobs dying of old age so that gatherer profession may find material without always having to fight (?)
      • Hide mobs killed by players without gathering gear not loosing their hide count (?)
      • ...
      As you can see, there is a lot. And thus you see me asking here in this thread, what the future may hold.

      Also: Every language has room for kind replies. When i see people shutting down other people with direct attacks or (in my case, thx @Piddle) with childish remarks that have no merrit at all other than to ridicule, then the forum is not working as intended.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Archiemedis ().

    • I have loved this game since the day it came out. Issues, and all. It has been fun, made lots of friends, and played with groups, by myself, guilds and alliances. Since the new F2P, the number of players has really made the game a lot less fun. So many players, most pvp, and no resources for those of us who also like to gather and craft.

      I spend time chopping trees in Royal and Black Zones, and for the most part every resource is now gone, or has 1/5 resources, It is a waste of time. From playing 20 hours at least a week, to barely logging on in the past few weeks. The number of people have sucked the life out of the game for me. There were days when I would pvp with friends, or guild mates, but now you can barely get out of the realm gates, without groups of 20-30 people jumping you. Oh what fun.....every time you go into the bz you need a large group or your alliance to come. REALLY, was that your plan.

      The Royal zones are stipped clean, and even the new players I've met, talked with, and helped are frustrated. Your business model is not working very well, if your veterans heavy players are leaving, and the newbies are not having fun because it there are no resources, and they are ganked everytime they go out on their own.

      I know ganking is part of the game, but everytime I go into a tunnel there are 20 gankers, sitting killing, and on the other side is someone who has been wiped by a huge group. New players get ganked, I get it, happened to all of us. However, this new model is just bad for all who want to enjoy the game besides ganking. I really want to love the game again, but right now, I've stopped playing except for my log on to farm, get my bonus points, try to gather, and just quit. Someone asked me yesterday what was the best skill, and I said learn to PK, because the game has nothing else to offer anyone anymore.
      Live, Laugh, Play :)
    • LadyDaisy wrote:

      Someone asked me yesterday what was the best skill, and I said learn to PK, because the game has nothing else to offer anyone anymore.
      I could not disagree more. I just came back after 7 months off and the game is better than ever. Sounds like you need to work on your evasion and escape skills. The ability for me to gather open world T8 now is amazing.

      I’ve been out gathering solo in t8 zones and CV and only died once due to a windows update minimizing the game on me. I get jumped by gankers a few times and yeah there are a lot in portal zones, but I found easy ways to escape and evade.

      I love the increased number of players personally. Also haven’t noticed a real decrease in available resources in BZ. Sure royals were down but you should have to compete for resources. No content and safe gathering is not a recipe for a fun game and was a big reason I stopped playing.
    • Why not add a 20 man legendary dungeon (like raids), with server wide announcement of spawn time (not position)
      Make it so that will take long enough to clear (so dive groups can be set up ) and offers epic rewards ( maybe some battlemount?) , it should have a rare spawn timer and spawn in multiple black zone continents at the same time. ( to offer multiple guilds/alliances acces)
      Make the mobs strong enough so a well organised, or very well geared group is needed to clear them and make the reward big enough its worth the risk of getting killed doing it.

      This will bring more reason to PVP, more roaming different zones and i bet it will make alot of PVE-lovers happy too.
    • thecheatmine wrote:

      Goldorack wrote:

      Shaidor wrote:

      Captainrussia wrote:

      Midgard wrote:

      Zarakichan wrote:

      Shame.... still no EU servers
      one server only thanks.
      already confirmed multiple times that this game will be only 1 server.Thanks for reading...
      I love the One Server concept but please fix the server lag and our ping.. i play with 150 ping all the time.. Use CDN servers around the world...
      Totally agree they should create some relay servers around the world who centralizing all the data into one server to make the game consistent in one unique open world.
      Hmm ? I don't see how CDN could help in any way with server ping :Yes some relay servers around the world would reduce your in game ping but in order to stay real time those relay servers would still have to connect to the main server so that's pretty useless and would just have the same result.
      And if they just "centralize" the data from time to time but actually play on relay servers then it would defeat the purpose of having just one server because that'd mean you couldn't play against a guild from another part of the world.
      CDN could at best just have a better ping to the main server than you do but that's all
      media.netflix.com/en/company-b…-great-viewing-experience
    • Eltharyon wrote:

      Player Customization Options
      Many of you have been asking us to include a customization system for your characters and we finally have a customization concept we’re happy with. There are three types of customization we want to support for now:

      Character Customization: The ability to change the appearance of your character after creation (including introduction of new hairstyles, beards, etc.)

      Wardrobe: We’re planning to add a “Wardrobe” feature, which allows you to customize your appearance by “overriding” your current looks with a more spectacular outfit. This override would by default be visible in safe zones and invisible to others in dangerous zones, though players can change this setting at will.

      Mount Skins: Finally, we want to add the ability to customize your mounts. Each skin would work on a particular category of mount (so others can still recognize your Oxen, although it may be a tricked out Spectre Oxen) and will allow us to reward you with cool mount skins in future Adventurer Challenges.
      would be great to implement in that closet a way to put the combination of items of your liking, but that the piece was consumed, so you have to sacrifice an item to have it inside your closet, and only if you can use it whenever you want as appearance , on your original set, and that people can inspect your original set only if you have unlocked that option, or vice versa, that would be interesting to make strange combinations with your items and that it would be more complicated to identify what items you wear so that they make you counter

      (It's just a suggestion)
    • I just realized these days that when you pick up gear as loot from mobs it makes the Crafted By be your character's name. I mean, it is just a little detail, but I would say that it should be the crafter's name in the item forever, like a blacksmith's mark. Since the player only got it because someone made it and sold to the black market.

      Would love if we could make some customizations on the weapons, like change colors, put marks or a colored glow, but only allow these changes depending on the quality of the crafted item, like if it is normal or good you cannot change a thing, if it is excellent i can make it have a mark, and if it is masterpiece it can have my mark and my customized glow or something like that, so a t8 crafter that can make masterpieces will be known by everyone that gets an item crafted by him. I guess you did not call the xp fame for no reason.

      But nice work SBI, loving albion online since I started playing.
    • GumChopper wrote:

      I just realized these days that when you pick up gear as loot from mobs it makes the Crafted By be your character's name. I mean, it is just a little detail, but I would say that it should be the crafter's name in the item forever, like a blacksmith's mark. Since the player only got it because someone made it and sold to the black market.

      Would love if we could make some customizations on the weapons, like change colors, put marks or a colored glow, but only allow these changes depending on the quality of the crafted item, like if it is normal or good you cannot change a thing, if it is excellent i can make it have a mark, and if it is masterpiece it can have my mark and my customized glow or something like that, so a t8 crafter that can make masterpieces will be known by everyone that gets an item crafted by him. I guess you did not call the xp fame for no reason.

      But nice work SBI, loving albion online since I started playing.
      Correct, I thought it is still "crafted by: system" as I remember it from the past.