Pinned The Current Albion Online Round Table

    • Georg51 wrote:

      Hello all,

      I'm UnkleRukus in game, the founding GM and current co-GM of Death-and-Taxes and I would like to throw my hat in for a bid at the round table.

      I have played the game for over a year now. I came to the game with a vast history of MMO experience including: being a raid leader for a competitive WoW guild for 5 years, achieving 2 server-firsts raid clears and many other accollades. I am also an original Beta tester for Ultima Online where I was a member of the notorious Evil is Good guild on the Great Lakes and Baja shards, and played UO heavily for over 9 years. I also was a GM of a large alliance guild in Shadowbane, Dark Age of Camalot, and was an early invester and player in Darkfall Online.

      I came to Albion when a friend from other games and popular streamer, JonahVeil, introduced it to me. All he had to say was "full loot pvp, sandbox style," and I was in.

      In the 15 months I have played this game I came from a lowly nature hellgate rat, to a veteran ZvZer and main Healer in Vastly Superior where we achieved Crystal ranking in Season 7. I quickly became promoted to Recruiter, and then Officer where I organized regear programs and performed recruitment duties for the guild. After VS disbanded, I had a short stay in Tea Party, and then founded the guild Death-and-Taxes.

      Our guild's first claim to fame originated in our creation of the Avalonian Raid Discord, where we built a community of over 1000 players across many guilds and all royal cities to organize and complete high tier Avalonian Raids. We developed a strategy for the fastest full-clear of the dungeons including many 8.3 map full clears, the most of any group or community I know of in the game.

      Our guild also has become notorious for our ganking, bomb squads, and small-scale fighting (what we call "brawling"). Our community is based on the philosophy that we are all about having fun, and being competive, but also free to call our own shots and not be beholden to anyone but ourselves.

      This past season we made a goal to reach silver ranking, and we did so with many weeks left before season end. Had we wanted to push for gold we could have gotten it, but we preferred different content.

      The community that I and other founders have built here at Death-and-Taxes is something we are proud of and I am looking to contribute more to the game of Albion by becoming a member of the round table. We have achieved a lot for a mid-sized guild that has never relied on joining big alliances or holding many hands to get ahead. We prefer it the hard way and are proud of that.

      I believe I have a lot to offer the round table and I know the new requirements are to be a GM of a guild that reaches gold, and so I ask that all the accomplishments that I have had alongside my history and knowledge of gaming, as well as my personal accolades (I am a former military officer, successful financial professional, coach, teacher, and father of 4 children) be taken into account in determining my qualifications.

      I could bring a lot of value and perspective to the round table with a mature approachand a creative mind that is also well-attuned to the desires of the playerbase. Therefore I hope you consider my application.

      Thank you for your consideration, and have a good day.

      -UnkleRukus, co-GM of Death-and-Taxes

      I can vouch for this. Rukus should be on the Round Table regardless of hitting Silver. With the introduction of Mists, smaller guilds need a larger voice. The rules to get on the Round Table need to adapt for the patch tomorrow.

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

    • Elsa wrote:

      Hey everyone,

      Some of you may or may not be aware of the existence of the Round Table. This topic is meant to shine some light on it, inform you of its purpose, as well as give you information on how you can become a member yourself.


      What is the Albion Online Round Table
      The Round Table is a designated forum additional to the public forum, and a point of contact to our team, that enables us to efficiently gather feedback and suggestions about the game’s existing and upcoming features from experienced and knowledgeable members of the community on behalf of their area of representation.


      What the Round Table is not
      The Round Table does not provide any in-game advantages for its members. For example, any upcoming changes that affect the in-game economy are also shared publicly at the same time. All suggestions made on the Round Table are placed under the same scrutiny by developers as any other feedback shared on the public forums.


      How do I join the Albion Online Round Table?
      In order to qualify, you must meet one of the following requirements:
      • Be a Guild Master of a guild that reached Gold or Crystal ranking in the previous Guild Season
      • Climb to the top of the Monthly Player Leaderboards
      • Be an otherwise notable figure within the community and contribute constructive feedback on the forum

      Too juicy not to respond.
      • Isn't the claim about no in-game advantage already proven false with the Siphoned Energy changes a while back, where people on the round table had a head start as far information is concerned for when the patch hit the live servers to prepare accordingly?
      • Interesting who you're all excluding as round table material:
        • Every guild member whose guild didn't get a Gold or Crystal ranking in a guild season
        • Everyone who doesn't make the top of the monthly leaderboards
        • Everyone who isn't a notable figure of the community
        • Everyone who doesn't post "constructive" feedback
      I'd say by rule of thumb you exclude 99,999% of the player base.

      Also you're almost fanatically biased into actually thinking only the top-dogs would be able to offer valuable feedback.

      Where are the advocates for:
      • Solo players
      • Solo or small group PvE
      • Gatherers and crafters
      • Forced PvP critics
      • etc.
    • Gank wrote:

      This is one of my favorite forum threads.

      Lofthild wrote:

      Elsa wrote:

      Hey everyone,

      Some of you may or may not be aware of the existence of the Round Table. This topic is meant to shine some light on it, inform you of its purpose, as well as give you information on how you can become a member yourself.


      What is the Albion Online Round Table
      The Round Table is a designated forum additional to the public forum, and a point of contact to our team, that enables us to efficiently gather feedback and suggestions about the game’s existing and upcoming features from experienced and knowledgeable members of the community on behalf of their area of representation.


      What the Round Table is not
      The Round Table does not provide any in-game advantages for its members. For example, any upcoming changes that affect the in-game economy are also shared publicly at the same time. All suggestions made on the Round Table are placed under the same scrutiny by developers as any other feedback shared on the public forums.


      How do I join the Albion Online Round Table?
      In order to qualify, you must meet one of the following requirements:
      • Be a Guild Master of a guild that reached Gold or Crystal ranking in the previous Guild Season
      • Climb to the top of the Monthly Player Leaderboards
      • Be an otherwise notable figure within the community and contribute constructive feedback on the forum

      Too juicy not to respond.
      • Isn't the claim about no in-game advantage already proven false with the Siphoned Energy changes a while back, where people on the round table had a head start as far information is concerned for when the patch hit the live servers to prepare accordingly?
      • Interesting who you're all excluding as round table material:
        • Every guild member whose guild didn't get a Gold or Crystal ranking in a guild season
        • Everyone who doesn't make the top of the monthly leaderboards
        • Everyone who isn't a notable figure of the community
        • Everyone who doesn't post "constructive" feedback
      I'd say by rule of thumb you exclude 99,999% of the player base.

      Also you're almost fanatically biased into actually thinking only the top-dogs would be able to offer valuable feedback.

      Where are the advocates for:
      • Solo players
      • Solo or small group PvE
      • Gatherers and crafters
      • Forced PvP critics
      • etc.


      <3
    • Fusionbomb wrote:

      Lofthild wrote:

      Where are the advocates for:
      • Solo players
      • Solo or small group PvE
      • Gatherers and crafters
      • Forced PvP critics
      • etc.

      There are a few, actually. I suppose we got there through the "Constructive Feedback" criteria.
      • How many is "a few" as an actual percentage?
      • How come the members of the round table aren't properly broken down with more data?
        • How many of those guilds are PvP-focused? I reckon the overwhelming majority, which means my solo PvE player persona won't be considered at all
        • What are "affiliates"? Going by the criteria laid out those can't be there, as there is nothing to justify their existence
        • Why is a "wiki guardian" or "wiki admin" sitting at the table?
        • For how long have the same guilds been sitting at the round table and influencing/tainting the game in their favor?
      So many questions, and I'm just getting started.
    • Lofthild wrote:

      Fusionbomb wrote:

      Lofthild wrote:

      Where are the advocates for:
      • Solo players
      • Solo or small group PvE
      • Gatherers and crafters
      • Forced PvP critics
      • etc.

      There are a few, actually. I suppose we got there through the "Constructive Feedback" criteria.
      • How many is "a few" as an actual percentage?
      • How come the members of the round table aren't properly broken down with more data?
        • How many of those guilds are PvP-focused? I reckon the overwhelming majority, which means my solo PvE player persona won't be considered at all
        • What are "affiliates"? Going by the criteria laid out those can't be there, as there is nothing to justify their existence
        • Why is a "wiki guardian" or "wiki admin" sitting at the table?
        • For how long have the same guilds been sitting at the round table and influencing/tainting the game in their favor?
      So many questions, and I'm just getting started.
      Oh boy I cant wait
    • Lofthild wrote:

      How many of those guilds are PvP-focused? I reckon the overwhelming majority, which means my solo PvE player persona won't be considered at all

      Korn wrote:

      First of all, note that our balance goal is to maximize the amount of PvP that happens in the game in a sustainable way.


      Non-consensual PvP in full loot games is extremely hard to do properly. The underlying issue is that it needs to be set up in such a way that it works in the long term, for both parties involved, the gankers, and the potential victims. Without potential victims, there is no non-consensual PvP.
      Korn has stated that they are doing their best to maintain non-consensual PvP (ganking) in their game. People advocating against it for the sake of PvE players will not be granted a seat by the devs. Their agenda doesn't fit with the way the devs want their game to be played.

      However, I must point out that a number of features do not make sense in the world of Albion.

      • HCE goes against every effort the devs have made to maximize the amount of PvP that happens in the game. I haven't read when & why it was introduced but my guess would be that it is a sad attempt of trying to keep PvE-ers in the game.
      • The cluster queue goes against the concept of open-world PvP with no rules. It aims to make large fights fair with additional rules. There is no such thing as a fair fight in a real open-world PvP.
      • The reputation system is a feature that punishes players for doing PvP in a PvP orientated game according to Korn's statement above. No wonder that it is functioning so poorly in preventing griefing. Had I known that I wouldn't have bothered writing my reputation system change post which was the reason why I joined this forum.
      • Portal bubbles, dismount CC immunity, and hideouts. All of those offer protection in places where there should be none. Adding rules to the open-world PvP.
      • Roads of Avalon is essentially a heavily instanced maze, created in a dire attempt of offering a somewhat safe place for smaller groups of players. It deviates significantly from the open-world concept of the game.
      The open-worldness of Albion is steadily leaving the game with every update. Rule after rule is being added to the game which limits open-world PvP interaction. Almost every form of PvP activity is instanced and limited. Corrupted dungeons are strictly 1v1 PvPvE dungeons. Hellgates are instanced 2v2 PvP. And now we have the Roads of Avalon update which aims to lock alliances out of a certain part of the game. I am not surprised that the game is abandoning the open-world PvP concept and replacing it with instanced content. It is much easier to balance instanced PvP than open-world PvP.

      I guess the devs are starting to realize that the easy victims in the open-world are not mindless NPCs, which continue to respawn and play the game no matter how many times are killed, so they've started limiting the open-world PvP under the pretense that their goal is to boost the number of potential victims. Many see progressing through unfair PvP (ganking) as Albion's unique feature. But that in fact is its inherent flaw.
      Life is Heaven & Hell is Living
    • I think you guys are making the false assumption that PvP players and PvE players are always mutually exclusive.

      Yes, some are strictly one or the other, but I'd venture to guess that most players enjoy both forms of content, such as I do and many in my guild as well.

      Apotosariel, I also think you are mistaken in saying that SBI is moving to "abandon" open world PvP. They will never abandon it, but maybe they recognize that only a portion of the game's playerbase actually partake and enjoy in it. If they wanted to abandon it, they would not have made zvz the sole function in determining territory control.

      And as I understand it, features such as disarray and cluster que were supposedly supported by this round table.

      As for the reputation system, its clear to any UO vet that it is strictly borrowed from OSI's reputation system, with the similar goal of punishing PK's so that rampant PKing doesn't ruin the game. As much as I hate to say it - it does its job well in limiting the PKing in the Royals since its apparent that SBI wants the royals to be safer than the black zones, and I am ok with that. There has to be a risk vs. reward factor in every facet of the game and balancing it isnt easy, and even more difficult is balancing in a way that pleases most players.

      Thats why we have so many different rulesets. Royals, black zones, roads, statics, avalonians, hellgates, corrupted dungeons. How can you say SBI is ignoring any type of player with that kind of variety of features?

      Is it perfect? Hell no. Could things be improved? Absolutely. But its a lot of work, and it takes 1 thing at a time.

      I am still patiently awaiting a response to my round table application, thanks.

      -UnkleRukus
      Evil is Good

      https://discord.gg/SUYJyeC
    • As an ex-member of the RT from season 7 and avalonian season, I would say that the RT should be viewable by everyone. The RT is most filled with members asking for changes to favor their own gains even though they're saying it's for the community.

      Normal players may not be able to post their suggestion on the round table to keep the thread clean. But at least it should be viewable so that everyone is aware of what's going on in the RT & could voice their opinion in the suggestion / feedack thread.

      Also, just because you're a leader of a gold-rank above guild, that doesn't mean you should be on the RT, especially during the current state of the game. There are other factors that should play into this like how active & how large is your guild weekly, the weekly pvp, pve fame of the guild, how influential a person / guild is in the community, etc
    • Apotosariel wrote:

      Lofthild wrote:

      How many of those guilds are PvP-focused? I reckon the overwhelming majority, which means my solo PvE player persona won't be considered at all

      Korn wrote:

      First of all, note that our balance goal is to maximize the amount of PvP that happens in the game in a sustainable way.


      Non-consensual PvP in full loot games is extremely hard to do properly. The underlying issue is that it needs to be set up in such a way that it works in the long term, for both parties involved, the gankers, and the potential victims. Without potential victims, there is no non-consensual PvP.
      Korn has stated that they are doing their best to maintain non-consensual PvP (ganking) in their game. People advocating against it for the sake of PvE players will not be granted a seat by the devs. Their agenda doesn't fit with the way the devs want their game to be played.
      However, I must point out that a number of features do not make sense in the world of Albion.

      • HCE goes against every effort the devs have made to maximize the amount of PvP that happens in the game. I haven't read when & why it was introduced but my guess would be that it is a sad attempt of trying to keep PvE-ers in the game.
      • The cluster queue goes against the concept of open-world PvP with no rules. It aims to make large fights fair with additional rules. There is no such thing as a fair fight in a real open-world PvP.
      • The reputation system is a feature that punishes players for doing PvP in a PvP orientated game according to Korn's statement above. No wonder that it is functioning so poorly in preventing griefing. Had I known that I wouldn't have bothered writing my reputation system change post which was the reason why I joined this forum.
      • Portal bubbles, dismount CC immunity, and hideouts. All of those offer protection in places where there should be none. Adding rules to the open-world PvP.
      • Roads of Avalon is essentially a heavily instanced maze, created in a dire attempt of offering a somewhat safe place for smaller groups of players. It deviates significantly from the open-world concept of the game.
      The open-worldness of Albion is steadily leaving the game with every update. Rule after rule is being added to the game which limits open-world PvP interaction. Almost every form of PvP activity is instanced and limited. Corrupted dungeons are strictly 1v1 PvPvE dungeons. Hellgates are instanced 2v2 PvP. And now we have the Roads of Avalon update which aims to lock alliances out of a certain part of the game. I am not surprised that the game is abandoning the open-world PvP concept and replacing it with instanced content. It is much easier to balance instanced PvP than open-world PvP.

      I guess the devs are starting to realize that the easy victims in the open-world are not mindless NPCs, which continue to respawn and play the game no matter how many times are killed, so they've started limiting the open-world PvP under the pretense that their goal is to boost the number of potential victims. Many see progressing through unfair PvP (ganking) as Albion's unique feature. But that in fact is its inherent flaw.
      • Sounds about right considering all PvE players got were reduced portal timers for SRDs, as Corrupted Dungeons have the built-in risk of being PvP
      • I'd call HCE rather a cheap and crude workaround as it's the only high-level 100% PvE activity the game offers if you excludes blue and yellow zones
      • True, there isn't such a thing as a fair fight in an open-world PvP, but how many solo and small groups or guilds will continue to play if they're annihilated every time by far larger groups or guilds when it just comes down to "Higher player count = win"?
      • As for protection: zoning into a zone via portal has to offer you some sort of protection, or else everyone would just sit around that portal to gank + no one would even bother using those portals. The rest is their own fault by going for a tile design with fixed entry/exit points which can be camped by a 5-year old instead of an actual open world in which I can take a safe detour
      • Albion Online was never an open world for PvE to begin with
      • ZvZ is open world, portal and entry/exit point ganking is open world etc.
      • It's a major design flaw the game is built upon:
        • Everyone who doesn't want to PvP has to PvP as red and black zones offer far better rewards and there is no actual choice in this matter, as staying in yellow will severely hinder your progress -> non-PvP players are forced into PvP zones
        • Those people make up the bulk of the prey for the gankers, and I reckon most people only play the "PvP" called "I gather my friend so we hunt solo players or small groups with almost no risk"
        • PvE players who don't want that can do next to nothing:
          • Leave the game for another one which actually values PvE players
          • Only playing e.g. in the early morning when not as much players are online
          • Shooting themselves in the foot and severely hindering their progress by staying in yellow zones





      A game like this has to be a buffet: your target audiences have to have plenty of choices or they won't even bother or leave early.
      Right now this game is all about feeding PvE players to the PvP crowd and all they can choose from is:
      • Getting dived in SRDs
      • Getting dived in dungeons
      • Getting ganked on the map
      • HCE
      • Never leaving yellow zones


      If I wouldn't have enough silver for another month of premium I would've already uninstalled the game after having seen most of the content during 2 months of playing, as PvE players evidently are the lowest caste in Albion Online and not even worth considering.

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

    • Parallel wrote:

      Good, meaningful PvE and Crafting does not exist in a game without PvP. Can someone find that article about UO which details a PvE'ers perspective of how bad they ruined the game from pushing for anti PvP changes like Trammel/Felucca? This is a yin and yang kind of thing, one does not exist without the other in a meaningful way.
      Oh no man, UO was really hardcore game and PK in UO was never be so cheap and easy as it now in AO.
      PK in UO even can not enter a town, can be killed by summoned guards, and must wash themselves as red in open world by killing a mobs, to become blue again.
      PK in UO was challenging, not rewarding.

      What we see in AO? PK is no challenge. PK mechanic was so stupid, so outlaw player can get bubbles, can enter yellow zone, right after they victim will die.
      UO never has such carebear mechanics for PKers, and still dont have.
    • Georg51 wrote:

      Again Lofthild you are making the false assumption that PvE players and PvP players are mutually exclusive, when that is more the exception and not the rule.

      It's more about Risk vs. Reward.
      • They obviously are mutually exclusive, or did you see any meaningful PvE change other than shorter portal timers for SRDs? If you look at past patch notes you'd think this game only offers PvP with a few tiny changes to gathering/crafting, with the main mode being ZvZ
      • As long as the round table members aren't properly specified you can't convince me that ~30-50% of the members are advocating for PvE changes
      • This game almost has no risks if you just have more players on your side:
        • Bring your raid group to dive SRDs: free loot, 0 risk
        • Bring your raid group to portal gank: free loot, 0 risk
        • Be the bigger group during ZvZ: plenty of loot, a modicum of risk
        The main risk is felt by solo players or very small groups

      But arguing with people over the last two days showed me that the game did almost nothing for PvE in the last few months and I have 0 desire to play this game anymore, a game in which a solo player is the easiest prey and if I want to PvE I always have to live with forced PvP if I want good item/silver/fame progress.

      Oh well, at least I played my first sandbox game.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Lofthild ().

    • Lofthild wrote:

      Georg51 wrote:

      Again Lofthild you are making the false assumption that PvE players and PvP players are mutually exclusive, when that is more the exception and not the rule.

      It's more about Risk vs. Reward.
      • They obviously are mutually exclusive, or did you see any meaningful PvE change other than shorter portal timers for SRDs? If you look at past patch notes you'd think this game only offers PvP with a few tiny changes to gathering/crafting, with the main mode being ZvZ
      • As long as the round table members aren't properly specified you can't convince me that ~30-50% of the members are advocating for PvE changes
      • This game almost has no risks if you just have more players on your side:
        • Bring your raid group to dive SRDs: free loot, 0 risk
        • Bring your raid group to portal gank: free loot, 0 risk
        • Be the bigger group during ZvZ: plenty of loot, a modicum of risk
        The main risk is felt by solo players or very small groups


      But arguing with people over the last two days showed me that the game did almost nothing for PvE in the last few months and I have 0 desire to play this game anymore, a game in which a solo player is the easiest prey and if I want to PvE I always have to live with forced PvP if I want good item/silver/fame progress.

      Oh well, at least I played my first sandbox game.

      Did you try the latest patch? There are tons of PvE / changes for PvEers. It's at least half and half man. Most PvPers think there is a ton of PvE / Crafting changes coming in, you're just on the PvE side of thinking it's all PvP changes. At the end of the day, the first feature advertised on the AO website is PvP so it should be the focus.