Testserver Patch Notes - Queen Patch 7

    • Tabor wrote:

      They did nerf the fame in T7/T8 dungeons with Queen (also perplexing) which also caused a nerf to the silver. I wonder if this is what also caused the initial feeling of less loot. But regardless back to the point if they just revert dungeons back to how they were set pre Queen that would fix the issue instead of this weird weekly tinkering game.
      Part of it is that they didn't just change the loot. They changed loot in the middle of a massive upheavel update, that created new economic patterns in the game. Increasing distances between things hugely, so logistics were harder. Removing resource flow into Caerleon.

      So some of the loot being crappy was some things, and some was other things, but its hard to tell what did what because so many things happened at once.
      Discord: Piddle#7413
      "The purpose of existence is simple: everything is fuel for the magmaw." —Jaji, magmaw worshipper
    • PrintsKaspian wrote:

      Previously, Silver Bags picked up as loot were treated as items, and were not subject to guild taxes. These are now treated like direct Silver drops, meaning they are subject to both guild taxes and the alliance Silver penalty described above.

      If you're going to make bags like direct silver drops, why not auto-add the silver to the players (minus tax) when the chest is opened? That way we don't have to spam "use" (or see others do it). :)

      That would also mean you couldn't save your bags, drop guild at some point, and use them without any tax/penalty.
    • Piddle wrote:

      Lanzier wrote:

      Captainrussia wrote:

      Can I ask an obvious question? (was already asked above too)

      Why can't we just revert the change to how it was pre-Queen?

      Loot before Queen was not broken. Why this change all of a sudden?
      They didn’t do anything at Queen to intentionally change dungeon loot. It was only at patch 5 that they changed anything. So I don’t think they know how to revert something they didn’t change.my theory, which I don’t think I can prove without data pre and post queen, is that the queen additions accidentally nerfed solo/group dungeons. Avalonian dungeons, the buff to castle and castle outpost loot, and the change to the open world treasure chests shifted where the loot went without intentionally nerfing dungeons. So now when a castle shits out a bunch of loot it increases the likelihood that a roll in a solo rd treasure chest comes up empty.
      I'm not saying you are wrong, because I don't know how dungeon chests work at all, but they definitely were changing silver drops in Queen and silver drops are what run the BM, right?

      PrintsKaspian wrote:

      Tier 7 and 8 Mob Fame Changes
      With increased quantity of and access to high-tier zones, the Silver and PvE kill Fame given by T7-T8 mobs has been reduced. The Avalonian Grail Buff (see above) gives high-level players additional opportunities to earn increased PvE Fame.

      I forgot about the change to t7 and T8 mobs. The devs said at some point that one of the possibilities for why dungeon loot feels worse is that more people are doing t7/T8 dungeons (bc they are more common post queen which is why silver/fame was nerfed) but items have always dropped less often in those Dungeons so it made loot feel subjectively worse. You got better drops but got them less often. That is why they made the patch 5 changes to increase the quantity of loot in high level chests.

      Perhaps the combination of more high level dungeon runs with less silver dropped resulted in a double punch to both The amount of loot dropped and the perception. I don’t really pay attention to t7/T8 items on the black market so I have no idea if quantities changed post queen.

      on the other hand if silver was nerfed because high tier zones are more accessible wouldn’t that mean more t7/T8 mobs were being killed Thus offsetting the potential nerf to the total quantity of silver for the black market?

      Do we know if the silver available to the black market is segregated by which tier of mob drops it? All I know is it buys way more low tier items, so I would guess t7 silver drops partially fund t4 item purchases.

      This is a ramble of a post. the black market is a black box so I have no idea how it determines how much silver goes to which items.
    • I cannot speak for all of BZ but I can for certain tell you the T7 and T8 SRDs are not at all ran in high volume around Lymhurst. They started out decent contact rates during the initial post Queen launch and had rapidly degraded each week since to the current abysmal contact rates of today. If anyone knows of any more hopping areas to dive let me know!
    • Roccandil wrote:

      PrintsKaspian wrote:

      Previously, Silver Bags picked up as loot were treated as items, and were not subject to guild taxes. These are now treated like direct Silver drops, meaning they are subject to both guild taxes and the alliance Silver penalty described above.
      If you're going to make bags like direct silver drops, why not auto-add the silver to the players (minus tax) when the chest is opened? That way we don't have to spam "use" (or see others do it). :)

      That would also mean you couldn't save your bags, drop guild at some point, and use them without any tax/penalty.
      This, please.
    • Look that Is a simulation problem.

      They want to fix it, they change around, but somehow result not comes as desired.

      In software development you try to simplify the problem.

      So, as I understand it, each chest rolls a value of silver, based on that total amount of silver it rolls against BM

      So

      Step 1:
      Roll total silver value of chest

      Step 2:
      Roll that total value against BM

      Step one is easy to simulate, the good question do devs and players are agree that this amount is ok?

      Never was verified

      Second step, much more tricky. If the silver pool rolls vs BM and BM cannot deliver no loot..

      I would suggest u give out the loot in silver bags for 2 weeks and we collect feedback if that be okay

      And after that we check translation of bm..
    • On the dungeon loot, here is what we did in a nutshell:

      Based on the community’s feedback, we have reworked the loot in randomized dungeon chests according to the following principles:
      • T6 chests have been largely reverted to the status that they had on Queen’s launch as these chests were very popular with the player base. (this also means significantly less "trash" loot and higher chances for good drops again)
      • We have used the old T6 chest balancing as a baseline and set up T7 and T8 chests as strictly better versions of them.
      • T7 chests no longer contain T4 loot and have higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests
      • T8 chests no longer contain T4 and T5 loot, and have much higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests.
      We hope that these changes will significantly improve the loot experience in the game.
    • Korn wrote:

      On the dungeon loot, here is what we did in a nutshell:

      Based on the community’s feedback, we have reworked the loot in randomized dungeon chests according to the following principles:
      • T6 chests have been largely reverted to the status that they had on Queen’s launch as these chests were very popular with the player base. (this also means significantly less "trash" loot and higher chances for good drops again)
      • We have used the old T6 chest balancing as a baseline and set up T7 and T8 chests as strictly better versions of them.
      • T7 chests no longer contain T4 loot and have higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests
      • T8 chests no longer contain T4 and T5 loot, and have much higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests.
      We hope that these changes will significantly improve the loot experience in the game.
      I don't know why I even bother responding considering your "sledgehammer 180°" approach to "fix" things.
      • Why does T6 have to follow the post-Queen progression, but T7 and T8 will get the T6 pre-Queen progression as baseline?
      • What are the drop chances as an actual percentage?
      • Do dungeons only begin with T6 or why does every random dungeon < T6 not get any adjustments?


      It took you how many weeks to realize that dungeon loot was garbage?
      Your "reaction time" is a good indicator of how much you care about your customers and your game and it's especially telling how much you actually play your own game.

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

    • Korn wrote:

      On the dungeon loot, here is what we did in a nutshell:

      Based on the community’s feedback, we have reworked the loot in randomized dungeon chests according to the following principles:
      • T6 chests have been largely reverted to the status that they had on Queen’s launch as these chests were very popular with the player base. (this also means significantly less "trash" loot and higher chances for good drops again)
      • We have used the old T6 chest balancing as a baseline and set up T7 and T8 chests as strictly better versions of them.
      • T7 chests no longer contain T4 loot and have higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests
      • T8 chests no longer contain T4 and T5 loot, and have much higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests.
      We hope that these changes will significantly improve the loot experience in the game.

      Lofthild wrote:

      Korn wrote:

      On the dungeon loot, here is what we did in a nutshell:

      Based on the community’s feedback, we have reworked the loot in randomized dungeon chests according to the following principles:
      • T6 chests have been largely reverted to the status that they had on Queen’s launch as these chests were very popular with the player base. (this also means significantly less "trash" loot and higher chances for good drops again)
      • We have used the old T6 chest balancing as a baseline and set up T7 and T8 chests as strictly better versions of them.
      • T7 chests no longer contain T4 loot and have higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests
      • T8 chests no longer contain T4 and T5 loot, and have much higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests.
      We hope that these changes will significantly improve the loot experience in the game.
      I don't know why I even bother responding considering your "sledgehammer 180°" approach to "fix" things.
      • Why does T6 have to follow the post-Queen progression, but T7 and T8 will get the T6 pre-Queen progression as baseline?
      • What are the drop chances as an actual percentage?
      • Do dungeons only begin with T6 or why does every random dungeon < T6 not get any adjustments?


      It took you how many weeks to realize that dungeon loot was garbage?
      Your "reaction time" is a good indicator of how much you care about your customers and your game and it's especially telling how much you actually play your own game.


      How did the Developers come to a conclusion Chests were "bad" ? I recall the only complain the Community was making involved Avalonian Dungeon loot being bad so how did other Dungeons also get the poor rework prior to Patch 7?
      Im więcej ludzi na ZvZ tym Surfy i Poe będą mniej hajsu chcieli za nie wyjebanie waszej ziemianki. Wojna Polsko Polska AO. Wesołe Ziemniaczki.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Evas_Flarelight: Resized the image. ().

    • Silver BagsTaxed
      • Previously, Silver Bags picked up as loot were treated as items, and were not subject to guild taxes. These are now treated like direct Silver drops, meaning they are subject to both guild taxes and the alliance Silver penalty described above.

      I can see potato guilds being happy about this change.

      I've tested the invis shrine. For me it won't change the portal gate ganking issue (you just put the dudes 1 map further that's it), 100% confident about that. If thoses invis shrines should be a thing just put only one in each realmgate city and that's it. The one in each portal exit should absolutely not be a thing. Doing this you will make a 99% safe zone portal maps and should not be a thing.

      I can understand for departures but for arrivals, in a bz map, it's beyond wrong...

      I'll come later to find better solutions around this issue but i want to know first what's the actual trash rate mechanic in the game back from 2014? @Korn

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

    • Roccandil wrote:

      PrintsKaspian wrote:

      Previously, Silver Bags picked up as loot were treated as items, and were not subject to guild taxes. These are now treated like direct Silver drops, meaning they are subject to both guild taxes and the alliance Silver penalty described above.
      If you're going to make bags like direct silver drops, why not auto-add the silver to the players (minus tax) when the chest is opened? That way we don't have to spam "use" (or see others do it). :)

      That would also mean you couldn't save your bags, drop guild at some point, and use them without any tax/penalty.
      @Roccandil can u please stop and propose piss easy solutions that would be no effort but let them look stupid. That is not nice

      It have understood that and stopped e.g. propose to use in 2hg the open world treasure chest that breaks channel on damage and to fix the 2hg rat problem in 5 mins.. because too easy fast and working is not nice to put on the table it someone worked hard at a complex solution..

      A similar approach would be to simply restrict alliance to 300 but it is more high sophisticated to make tons of penalties etc. And other to indirectly force people to split..
    • Korn wrote:

      On the dungeon loot, here is what we did in a nutshell:

      Based on the community’s feedback, we have reworked the loot in randomized dungeon chests according to the following principles:
      • T6 chests have been largely reverted to the status that they had on Queen’s launch as these chests were very popular with the player base. (this also means significantly less "trash" loot and higher chances for good drops again)
      • We have used the old T6 chest balancing as a baseline and set up T7 and T8 chests as strictly better versions of them.
      • T7 chests no longer contain T4 loot and have higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests
      • T8 chests no longer contain T4 and T5 loot, and have much higher drop chances for T7 and T8 loot than T6 chests.
      We hope that these changes will significantly improve the loot experience in the game.
      what i still have as a question is: What about fragments? (Rune/soul/relic)

      Can't T7 and T8 just drop a range of fragments of different tiers just like T6 chests for consistency and improved feeling regarding loot?

      I understand that they just drop a bigger ammount of a single type (generally T4 or T5 runes), but this just lead to the feeling of an unworthy run.
    • PrintsKaspian wrote:

      Queen Patch 7

      This patch includes the second part of the Alliance Limit Test we recently announced. The first part went live with Patch 5 on February 26 and consisted of a Siphoned Energy Drain on alliances with 10 or more territories. The second part, a Silver and Fame Penalty on members of these guilds and alliances, is now in effect - details can be found below.

      Additionally, as this patch updates Outlands Portal Zones with new exits, layouts, and collisions, players who are in these zones and the zones that border them will be migrated to the nearest exit when the patch goes live. For more information please see this post: forum.albiononline.com/index.p…ion-Outland-Portal-Zones/

      Silver and Fame Penalty
      • All players within an alliance will receive reduced Silver and Fame income if the alliance holds 10 or more territories (excluding Castles and Castle Outposts)
      • This also applies to players in guilds without an alliance, if their guild holds 10 or more territories
      • This penalty applies to all Fame gained from gathering, fishing (and consuming fish), PvE, and Tomes of Insight, and all Silver gained from Silver Bags, mob drops, and downed players
      • This penalty starts at 1% with the 10th territory and increases by 1% per additional territory
      • For further information about these changes and more precise values, please see this post: forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/124568

      I am sorry, what Alliance problem you still want to solve by this? All central BZ captured by same guilds who is not in alliance but in NAP. There is no "giant alliances who dominate", but the main problem is still here.

      So, why you still wasting time on working in that direction, if you allredy can see it is not working, and didnt solve the real problem?
      I can understand if you have an idea, but not sure what happens, but this time is gone, now everyone can see it is just not working, but you still move this way...

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

    • iRawr wrote:

      PrintsKaspian wrote:

      Queen Patch 7

      This patch includes the second part of the Alliance Limit Test we recently announced. The first part went live with Patch 5 on February 26 and consisted of a Siphoned Energy Drain on alliances with 10 or more territories. The second part, a Silver and Fame Penalty on members of these guilds and alliances, is now in effect - details can be found below.

      Additionally, as this patch updates Outlands Portal Zones with new exits, layouts, and collisions, players who are in these zones and the zones that border them will be migrated to the nearest exit when the patch goes live. For more information please see this post: forum.albiononline.com/index.p…ion-Outland-Portal-Zones/

      Silver and Fame Penalty
      • All players within an alliance will receive reduced Silver and Fame income if the alliance holds 10 or more territories (excluding Castles and Castle Outposts)
      • This also applies to players in guilds without an alliance, if their guild holds 10 or more territories
      • This penalty applies to all Fame gained from gathering, fishing (and consuming fish), PvE, and Tomes of Insight, and all Silver gained from Silver Bags, mob drops, and downed players
      • This penalty starts at 1% with the 10th territory and increases by 1% per additional territory
      • For further information about these changes and more precise values, please see this post: forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/124568

      I am sorry, what Alliance problem you still want to solve by this? All central BZ captured by same guilds who is not in alliance but in NAP. There is no "giant alliances who dominate", but the main problem is still here.
      So, why you still wasting time on working in that direction, if you allredy can see it is not working, and didnt solve the real problem?
      I can understand if you have an idea, but not sure what happens, but this time is gone, now everyone can see it is just not working, but you still move this way...
      well, I have no clue question is valid..

      Speculation could be that coding is outsourced and each change is requested, negotiated proposed and ordered.. this would explain the turnaround times and why easy fixes like 2hg are not done fast.. but I have no clue about the potential reason I am just guessing..
    • That's a bit of a wild guess there @Hollywoodi.

      Mostly when it comes to the game development, normally the outsourcing is done for QA. translation and cinematic work.

      The only time I've heard of development outsourcing is when it comes to Chinese companies, who just bump out a lot of mobile only games for small developers.

      The development process is far slower then people actually realise . When you're on the other side of the monitor, you can of course point fingers and think that things can be done extremely quickly. However; there are a lot of procedures and internal testing that needs to be carried out before it moves onto the next step.

      If they move into the next step, it can then lead to a bug appearing, which means they need to revisit the previous build to see if something is conflicting in such away, that the previous build has to be reworked to allow for such changes to be applied in the next version of a fix/update/patch etc.

      You also have priority lists, where something will take time to resolve as it's not their top priority at that given moment.

      At the end of the day people are impatient and they want things now or even yesterday. This is also the same for the game developers! They want people to play their games and enjoy the latest updates, but in reality, it's a time consuming process.
      Forum Rules
      Contact customer support via: support@albiononline.com
    • Doowie wrote:

      That's a bit of a wild guess there @Hollywoodi.

      Mostly when it comes to the game development, normally the outsourcing is done for QA. translation and cinematic work.

      The only time I've heard of development outsourcing is when it comes to Chinese companies, who just bump out a lot of mobile only games for small developers.

      The development process is far slower then people actually realise . When you're on the other side of the monitor, you can of course point fingers and think that things can be done extremely quickly. However; there are a lot of procedures and internal testing that needs to be carried out before it moves onto the next step.

      If they move into the next step, it can then lead to a bug appearing, which means they need to revisit the previous build to see if something is conflicting in such away, that the previous build has to be reworked to allow for such changes to be applied in the next version of a fix/update/patch etc.

      You also have priority lists, where something will take time to resolve as it's not their top priority at that given moment.

      At the end of the day people are impatient and they want things now or even yesterday. This is also the same for the game developers! They want people to play their games and enjoy the latest updates, but in reality, it's a time consuming process.
      • If you have a clear-cut vision of what to develop next + doing it agile in iterations it's a rather quick process
      • Based on the bugs I've reported so far their QA is understaffed, forced to release unfinished content or just bad
      • You mean a priority list like changing Avalonian dungeon loot first, even though every dungeon loot is still garbed across the board?
      • Considering Albion and why I'm impatient or rather annoyed to the point I'll let my sub lapse even though I have the silver for another month:
        • The last few patches were only about Zergion Online with complete disregard to every play-style except ZvZ
        • Dungeon loot being garbage for weeks, and yet e.g. fixes to Avalonian dungeon loot had priority
        • Anti-portal ganking measures are a band-aid at best with 0 attempts being made to fix the underlying issues like HG just being about ratting + bringing as many swaps as possible, no solo PvP etc.
        • Upcoming dungeon loot fixes will only affect T6+ as if there are no lower dungeon tiers available which also need loot fixes
        • Close to nothing for me as a solo PvE player, as safe zones end with T5 and to get decent fame/silver/loot I have to go to T6+ PvP zones
        • Non-existent opt-out of PvP, even though this is supposed to be a MMORPG sandbox
        • etc.
      • If you have a clear-cut vision of what to develop next + doing it agile in iterations it's a rather quick process
      Yes it can indeed be a quick process, if you have a vision as to what you want to achieve. However; in any development process (project management), there is always a risk factor and those risks are unforeseen bugs, which can cause the process to be delayed for x amount of time. There is also the extreme reaction that an update/patch has be cancelled and recreated from the ground up.

      • Based on the bugs I've reported so far their QA is understaffed, forced to release unfinished content or just bad


      I unfortunately don't know how many employees Sandbox has for their Quality Assurance department. But having more is never a bad idea, but it's all down to "supply/demand". You don't want to over hire and then have to fire people after a single update. Of course there is outsourcing, but this runs the risk of bad communication between Sandbox and x company. Outsourcing also runs the risk of leaks and just bad work (this is what I've experienced myself when I was working in the gaming industry).

      • You mean a priority list like changing Avalonian dungeon loot first, even though every dungeon loot is still garbed across the board?


      A priority list being that game breaking bugs are fixed first, then ingame bugs, which are not game breaking, but is gathering a lot of negative feedback etc and then running into visual bugs and other bugs, which has been reported low in number, but it's something that needs to be taken care etc. Sometimes though just because people do not like a loot system doesn't mean it should be top of a priority list. (The dungeon loot issue is not a bug, but it's a big talking point and it just needs buffed/balanced from what is being talked about).

      • Considering Albion and why I'm impatient or rather annoyed to the point I'll let my sub lapse even though I have the silver for another month:
      • The last few patches were only about Zergion Online with complete disregard to every play-style except ZvZ
      • Dungeon loot being garbage for weeks, and yet e.g. fixes to Avalonian dungeon loot had priority
      • Anti-portal ganking measures are a band-aid at best with 0 attempts being made to fix the underlying issues like HG just being about ratting + bringing as many swaps as possible, no solo PvP etc.
      • Upcoming dungeon loot fixes will only affect T6+ as if there are no lower dungeon tiers available which also need loot fixes
      • Close to nothing for me as a solo PvE player, as safe zones end with T5 and to get decent fame/silver/loot I have to go to T6+ PvP zones
      • Non-existent opt-out of PvP, even though this is supposed to be a MMORPG sandbox
      • etc.


      I understand your frustration and I'm sure does the Sandbox, but there is only so many ways to nerf the zerg. Sure they can introduce more debuffs to large number of groups/alliances within a short distance of each other or even dramatically reduce the damage when it's more than 5v1, but you DO NOT want to make it so that a single player can wipe out a 5 man group. Unless they are bad and the single player really knows what they're doing.

      Dungeon loot is always a thing that will continue to change during the lifetime of the game. Things will improve, then they get a bit over the top, then a nerf lands and hit hard for a lot of people etc. It's a roller-coaster and it will never be balanced! Look at World of Warcraft for example, their loot system continues to frustrate many and it's going through a lot of changes over the years. People give feedback and the developers will look to see what can be done to make it better. But ultimately the best loot will always be from PvP and crafting. You also want to make dungeons repeatable for those who want PvE. If you give everyone all the top loot from the first few dungeons, then it's points of have them ingame after a while. You need to have that RNG as to which chest or items you may receive.

      Ganking will never be stopped and personally I do not want it to be stopped as it would just ruin the sytle & danger of the game. Gankers will move zones to another choke point and people just need to learn to adjust and find ways to avoid or combat the gankers. In an open PvP game, ganking will always exist. People don't like being ganked, the developers get that, but ganking has been in the game since it was released in Alpha, all the way through to it's current build. You have to fight fire with fire!

      If you want better loot, then you have to take a risk. They can't cater solely to the blue & yellow players. It would just again ruin the whole aspect of the game (of course you can never make all players happy as there will always be someone who will complain about something) --- "omg the water when I'm fishing doesn't move like real water, I'm going to the quit the game if it's not fixed" as an extreme example.

      Yes, if you want the higher end materials you will need to venture into those fully open PvP zones. Sometimes it's all about scouting the area and learning the routine/time frame when it's the most active. Then you can adjust your farming runs to be 30 to 45 minutes in one location and then you know you have to move soon as x guild / x gank squad will be rolling down that way soon.

      You should not be able to opt-out of PvP, which then allows you to enter red & black zones without any issue. This would just ruin the game as I've mentioned a few times.

      Of course all your points are valid to YOUR situation. But your situation doesn't fit the standard of the many who play Albion Online for it's open world pvp aspect. As I said earlier, you can never make all players happy as we all have something that we want added/removed that differs from the next player. This is why the developers do make the decision at the end of the day and it's their game and their vision on how it should be played.
      Forum Rules
      Contact customer support via: support@albiononline.com

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Doowie ().