Dev Talk: Development Update November 2020

    • So to sum up, we invest more into non-lethal pvp, balancing that with red-zones faction fights pvp and going even deeper into instanced PvP (HG's).

      It's not me downing your development, but once again I want to express my concerns regarding state of black zone open world pvp. We do not see any comments regarding hideout updates, which I hope to bring back balance to the reward vs risk of black zone activities.

      With the roads, hideout home system and so much instanced content (hce,hgs,corrupteds,cgvg) open world feels mostly empty. The only hot zones are around portal maps which is kinda overwhelming for small groups / solo players and discourage them to enter vastly empty black zone territories. The same for roads, even with such a huge population it feels empty in terms of small scale pvp, the number of road maps could be greatly reduced to improve situation.

      Tl;dr having more content means the player base will split, and you might have record-breaking population but part of the game might be dead. Whenever someone is running HCE, corrupted dungeons or faction fights, he's missing from black zones which are in my opinion (After roads implementation) way too big (and still controlled by mostly one alliance regardless of it's huge size)
    • glokz wrote:

      So to sum up, we invest more into non-lethal pvp, balancing that with red-zones faction fights pvp and going even deeper into instanced PvP (HG's).

      It's not me downing your development, but once again I want to express my concerns regarding state of black zone open world pvp. We do not see any comments regarding hideout updates, which I hope to bring back balance to the reward vs risk of black zone activities.

      With the roads, hideout home system and so much instanced content (hce,hgs,corrupteds,cgvg) open world feels mostly empty. The only hot zones are around portal maps which is kinda overwhelming for small groups / solo players and discourage them to enter vastly empty black zone territories. The same for roads, even with such a huge population it feels empty in terms of small scale pvp, the number of road maps could be greatly reduced to improve situation.

      Tl;dr having more content means the player base will split, and you might have record-breaking population but part of the game might be dead. Whenever someone is running HCE, corrupted dungeons or faction fights, he's missing from black zones which are in my opinion (After roads implementation) way too big (and still controlled by mostly one alliance regardless of it's huge size)
      Hey @glokz

      when composing our updates, we generally strive to cover multiple aspects at the same time - but as each update is limited in scale, it does mean that each update will have some focus points.

      So, for example, the Queen update had an extremely heavy open world / Outland focus. Throughout Queen, we said that we'd tackle the Royal continent next, which hasn't happened in Rise of Avalon (as that had the Roads (mid scale open world) and corrupted dungeons (open world based but instanced) as it's main features). Now when it comes to the next update, through faction warfare, which can probably be called the lead feature, it is 100% open world based - this time, it's the Royal continent though. And while there will be non-lethal FW, the lethal FW part will get a massive upgrade as well.

      When it comes to the update that comes after S-Update (exact name to be announced), it's very likely that it will have a significant focus on the Outlands again. Also, with regards to that, note that we'll likely introduce multi-cluster Outland fights through a patch this year to deal with the current queue-sitting issues.
    • Korn wrote:

      glokz wrote:

      So to sum up, we invest more into non-lethal pvp, balancing that with red-zones faction fights pvp and going even deeper into instanced PvP (HG's).

      It's not me downing your development, but once again I want to express my concerns regarding state of black zone open world pvp. We do not see any comments regarding hideout updates, which I hope to bring back balance to the reward vs risk of black zone activities.

      With the roads, hideout home system and so much instanced content (hce,hgs,corrupteds,cgvg) open world feels mostly empty. The only hot zones are around portal maps which is kinda overwhelming for small groups / solo players and discourage them to enter vastly empty black zone territories. The same for roads, even with such a huge population it feels empty in terms of small scale pvp, the number of road maps could be greatly reduced to improve situation.

      Tl;dr having more content means the player base will split, and you might have record-breaking population but part of the game might be dead. Whenever someone is running HCE, corrupted dungeons or faction fights, he's missing from black zones which are in my opinion (After roads implementation) way too big (and still controlled by mostly one alliance regardless of it's huge size)
      Hey @glokz
      And while there will be non-lethal FW, the lethal FW part will get a massive upgrade as well.


      @Korn

      Why would you have non-lethal FW? It's antithetical to the core of the game. Yet another step in the wrong direction.

      You've taken so many steps in the wrong direction I sometimes think you can't even see where you came from when you look back.

      Albion Online was supposed to be an open world, full loot PvP game.

      This used to be the case, around launch. The majority of the game population was PvPing out in the open world, which was heavily populated because if you wanted to FF you had to go to static dungeons or to open world boss zones.

      Now? 99% of FF happens literally inside the city with HCE, or in small instanced random dungeons.

      And now you're also reducing the amount of lethal PvP.

      It is becoming apparent that the dev team is out of touch and incompetent (consistently relying on band-aid fixes).

      It's supposed to be an OPEN WORLD PVP GAME. Every single expansion so far has taken a step away from that direction.

      Instead of buffing/strengthening static mobs inside and outside the static, reworking boss zones (and creating more / expanding the area of the open world boss areas), you have actively been depopulating the open world by adding random dungeons and letting the clownfiesta of a dev-legacy (HCE) snowball out of control.

      It's really sad to see that SBI's dev team isn't up to the task of preserving the open world focus Albion Online was first designed to be.

      I bet you keep telling eachother that people are just mad for no reason. But the reality check here is that you're just incompetent. The fact that every single update since launch has actively depopulated the open world is testament to that.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Phosphia ().

    • Phosphia wrote:


      Why would you have non-lethal FW? It's antithetical to the core of the game. Yet another step in the wrong direction.
      Before going into that, it’s important to underscore that we’re invested into making sure that full loot Faction Warfare remains available and exciting in the red zone, and that’s also why we’re making sure that the full loot version of Faction Warfare will be the most rewarding.

      The core focus of the game will always be full loot PvP; even if some portions of features don’t directly offer that. If we offer stepping-stone content such as non-lethal Hellgates, Crystals, or going forward Faction Warfare, it’s with the aim of maximizing full loot PvP by enabling more players to graduate to it.

      As far as player development goes, one of the biggest hurdles to an advancing player’s experience in Albion is the jump from safe areas into full loot PvP areas. There’s really no threat prior to this advancement, and we ask players to make this jump without the necessary tools to do so: namely PvP experience and allies to make that jump with. One of the goals here is to soften that transition so more players are able to make that jump successfully, ultimately resulting in a healthier and more populated end game.

      In support of that is providing a low risk, inclusive environment where players can try out PvP without breaking their banks. This also allows players to become comfortable with the idea of PvP, while simultaneously forming bonds with other Faction members to both strengthen their Faction identity, as well as provide them with allies for the future.

      In an ideal situation, an advancing player would be trying Faction Warfare in the lower risk environment, make some friends while gaining some experience with PvP, the red zone event would start, and then they’d make that jump more comfortably knowing that they have some experience and a group they’ve already been playing with.

      Once they’ve made that jump once it’s much easier to make that jump again, and that player is ready to explore what Albion is really about: To kill...or be killed.

      So to expand on what was said initially, even if a change doesn’t seem to be in support of the end game full loot experience, it always is.
    • Obelis wrote:

      Phosphia wrote:

      Why would you have non-lethal FW? It's antithetical to the core of the game. Yet another step in the wrong direction.
      Before going into that, it’s important to underscore that we’re invested into making sure that full loot Faction Warfare remains available and exciting in the red zone, and that’s also why we’re making sure that the full loot version of Faction Warfare will be the most rewarding.
      The core focus of the game will always be full loot PvP; even if some portions of features don’t directly offer that. If we offer stepping-stone content such as non-lethal Hellgates, Crystals, or going forward Faction Warfare, it’s with the aim of maximizing full loot PvP by enabling more players to graduate to it.

      As far as player development goes, one of the biggest hurdles to an advancing player’s experience in Albion is the jump from safe areas into full loot PvP areas. There’s really no threat prior to this advancement, and we ask players to make this jump without the necessary tools to do so: namely PvP experience and allies to make that jump with. One of the goals here is to soften that transition so more players are able to make that jump successfully, ultimately resulting in a healthier and more populated end game.

      In support of that is providing a low risk, inclusive environment where players can try out PvP without breaking their banks. This also allows players to become comfortable with the idea of PvP, while simultaneously forming bonds with other Faction members to both strengthen their Faction identity, as well as provide them with allies for the future.

      In an ideal situation, an advancing player would be trying Faction Warfare in the lower risk environment, make some friends while gaining some experience with PvP, the red zone event would start, and then they’d make that jump more comfortably knowing that they have some experience and a group they’ve already been playing with.

      Once they’ve made that jump once it’s much easier to make that jump again, and that player is ready to explore what Albion is really about: To kill...or be killed.

      So to expand on what was said initially, even if a change doesn’t seem to be in support of the end game full loot experience, it always is.
      I 100% agree with this.

      But I also side with the current faction warfare players and what they see currently as a direct impact on their area of play (yellow & blue being non full loot), there was mention of a royal zone rework, but no actual details, there was a mention of this "red zone event" but no actual details... you see, the issue here currently is that A LOT of players are pissed off at this announcement mainly because they see their gameplay style under attack but haven't been given the full story on what's actually happening.

      Too much information given, but at the same time, too little detail was given on what this information means overall.
      Tired of LAGGING in-game? Try ExitLag;
      Use this LINK & code 'ROBIN' for 20% off any plan!
      youtube.com/c/robinhoodrs
    • Obelis wrote:

      Phosphia wrote:

      Why would you have non-lethal FW? It's antithetical to the core of the game. Yet another step in the wrong direction.
      Before going into that, it’s important to underscore that we’re invested into making sure that full loot Faction Warfare remains available and exciting in the red zone, and that’s also why we’re making sure that the full loot version of Faction Warfare will be the most rewarding.
      The core focus of the game will always be full loot PvP; even if some portions of features don’t directly offer that. If we offer stepping-stone content such as non-lethal Hellgates, Crystals, or going forward Faction Warfare, it’s with the aim of maximizing full loot PvP by enabling more players to graduate to it.

      As far as player development goes, one of the biggest hurdles to an advancing player’s experience in Albion is the jump from safe areas into full loot PvP areas. There’s really no threat prior to this advancement, and we ask players to make this jump without the necessary tools to do so: namely PvP experience and allies to make that jump with. One of the goals here is to soften that transition so more players are able to make that jump successfully, ultimately resulting in a healthier and more populated end game.

      In support of that is providing a low risk, inclusive environment where players can try out PvP without breaking their banks. This also allows players to become comfortable with the idea of PvP, while simultaneously forming bonds with other Faction members to both strengthen their Faction identity, as well as provide them with allies for the future.

      In an ideal situation, an advancing player would be trying Faction Warfare in the lower risk environment, make some friends while gaining some experience with PvP, the red zone event would start, and then they’d make that jump more comfortably knowing that they have some experience and a group they’ve already been playing with.

      Once they’ve made that jump once it’s much easier to make that jump again, and that player is ready to explore what Albion is really about: To kill...or be killed.

      So to expand on what was said initially, even if a change doesn’t seem to be in support of the end game full loot experience, it always is.
      Thank you for taking the time to read through some of my conerns and answer the part about Faction Warfare. I understand your position but I hope that you will exercise restraint when you implement safe-zones, so that it's only a few zones. Personally I think the game is best served with investing an effort into teaching players to use cheap gear instead of removing parts of the game entirely. Non-lethal PvP zones will come with many downsides, such as battle-mounts, 8.3 gear, lack of content as people are no longer incentivized into going there and finally it will create a very akward split between the players who are willing and not willing to cross into the lethal zones. As I understand the announcement, it looks like the lethal-zones will mostly be driven by larger timers and no so much spontaneous fights (something FW is currently known for). I hope you have some plans to offset that balance. Right now, the only way you can provoke a spontaneous faction fight is with a show of force outside an enemy faction city.

      If you remove lethal PvP from outside the cities, you need to think of a new way a faction can provoke spontaneous battles. Post update, people won't be able to make a show of force and then 'drag' the defending zerg out since it will ultimately consist of players on battle-mounts, 8.3 gear and others who aren't ready to zone into a lethal-zone for a fight.


      That said, I hope you had time to read through my other concerns as well about the values that govern your development decisions. Many of us are concerned about the direction the dev team is going with the game when it comes to open world activity. We joined this game on launch and we had statics and open world boss zones, nothing else really. Now it's all randomized dungeons and HCE. It's another game entirely.

      Many people are tired of the fact the only ZvZ content we get is from CTAs.. something heavily plagued by handholding. Handholding is an issue we all understand you have great difficulty in solving. But that is not an excuse for not giving us ZvZ content without handholding.

      If you turn the game back to open world FF, we will get spontaneous ZvZ activity outside of CTAs. This type of ZvZ will be less influenced by handholding as it happens organically.

      In order to support the growing demand for FF spots, you have used band-aid fixes like random dungeons and allowed HCE to snowball out of control. In turn, the world has become depopulated and no ZvZs happen outside of the grasp of handholding politics because of it. This game desperately needs ZvZs that happen organically. You can achieve this by letting players fight over FF spots. Improve statics and world boss zones (and make them larger) and cut down on the random dungeons. Random dungeons only support 5 players, so these will never start a ZvZ organically. Focus on statics and world boss zones. Those are the places that can escelate into large, organic ZvZs that this game is known and loved for.

      We are aware of the upcoming minor changes to the current world boss locations, buffed so that they may be a viable spot to FF. But its planned iteration it is still a far cry from what we need.

      The FF should be focused around staic dungeons (remove the random dungeons inside, buff the normal mobs outside) and the world boss locations.

      The post was edited 10 times, last by Phosphia ().

    • Looking back, full loot pvp is on retreat in my view.

      I come from a small scale to solo pvp player Perspektive...

      SRD was a hotspot, now it turned to a safe spot to farm and we got CD

      Unfortunately CD is a pve / pvp event with opt in pvp that is on a long timescale.. so all 10 mins I get the chance to catch a pve player that might try run away..opt out

      So in my eyes the intendet small scale pvp push with roads of avalon has reduced my pvp options..

      There was so much potential on SRD with avalon portals ..letting just players in first at once second after 2 mins.. third after 4..and then each 4 mins again..

      But I just judge by the result, which has left me with opt in pvp cd which is a dramatic reduction of small scale pvp opportunities, or at super optimistic..equal to what was there before roads..

      Maybe the hg patch will have an option for 1on1 hg with not opt in but full pvp ..

      But that's potentially a dream that won't come true .
    • The way I look at it...

      Introducing more instanced activities and going more retreat in pvp is synonymous with population growth and money making opportunities in Albion Online.

      Hence if this update causes another rise in population, then this is the right direction to go.

      One interesting thing to note is that since killing off HCE, population has been dropping. Hence SBI must be careful in their development to ensure the game keep surviving.

      Even though steam charts do not fully represent the full population, but it is good enough to see an indication of population trend. More instanced activities and more retreat in pvp seems to be the way for Albion Online to grow.

    • stkmro wrote:

      The way I look at it...

      Introducing more instanced activities and going more retreat in pvp is synonymous with population growth.
      This is false, and a dangerous fallacy.

      First of all HCE has not been nerfed. HCE and instanced PVE is still the primary source of FF (99+%) in Albion.

      Back in the day, open world (statics+boss zones) was 90+% of all FF. Today it represents less than 1% as it basically doesn't even exist.

      The random dungeons were added as a band-aid fix to accommodate an already growing population. That said, you don't have the data for player population growth with SBI introducing open world FF (since they literally haven't made any effort what so ever to pursue those), so your conclusion lacks data. I hope you're not in academics because you would have failed.

      Albion Online is supposed to be an open world, full loot PvP MMORPG. So that is what they should pursue. Unfortunately, they haven't done so in a very long time. Instead of reworking static dungeons and boss zones they have been relying on band-aid fixes, which effectively has depopulated the open world. This is a mistake many game devs have done over many MMO titles. It is sad that devs don't learn from eachother.

      That said, it doesn't hurt the game to have some instanced PVE content to help with player retention. But in the case of Albion, it has become the focal point to the detriment of the core game experience.

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

    • Phosphia wrote:

      stkmro wrote:

      The way I look at it...

      Introducing more instanced activities and going more retreat in pvp is synonymous with population growth.
      This is false, and a dangerous fallacy.
      First of all HCE has not been nerfed. HCE and instanced PVE is still the primary source of FF (99+%) in Albion.

      Back in the day, open world (statics+boss zones) was 90+% of all FF. Today it represents less than 1% as it basically doesn't even exist.

      The random dungeons were added as a band-aid fix to accommodate an already growing population.
      Interested where you got this numbers from? Or just your personal feeling?
      Small Scaler, Meuchelmörder & Notfall-Nature-Healer
      Proscriptus
      Ruhm und Ehre erwarten euch nur auf dem Schlachtfeld!
    • Piraterer wrote:

      Phosphia wrote:

      stkmro wrote:

      The way I look at it...

      Introducing more instanced activities and going more retreat in pvp is synonymous with population growth.
      This is false, and a dangerous fallacy.First of all HCE has not been nerfed. HCE and instanced PVE is still the primary source of FF (99+%) in Albion.

      Back in the day, open world (statics+boss zones) was 90+% of all FF. Today it represents less than 1% as it basically doesn't even exist.

      The random dungeons were added as a band-aid fix to accommodate an already growing population.
      Interested where you got this numbers from? Or just your personal feeling?
      I get this number by playing the game. Open world FF is undisputedly unviable, so coming to the conclusion of these numbers is hardly a point that can be challenged.

      Solo dungeons, 5-man dungeons, HCE, CD, Hell-gates and Avalonians are all instanced FF. None of these will ever create spontanious ZvZ conflicts the same way statics and open world boss zones did. So it should come as a surpirse to absolutely nobody that Albion Online has suffered the loss of spontanious ZvZs after the FF focal point as shifted from open world FF to instanced FF.

      It's just the natural consequence.

      The devs at SBI simply lack the skillset (or supervision and guidance from management) to balance the implementation of these features, so that they on the one hand help player retention through FF accommodation without on the other hand shifting the FF focus away from open world conflict.

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

    • So your strange playstyle not official numbers. A lot of ppl are openly fame farming in roads with great success.

      I totally appreciate a non lethal blue/Yellow FW Zone. No more knocking by reds and finishing by flagged ppl abusing a bug in PvP Areas (Hellgate/Chests).
      Also a lot of new content for new players without risking their gear and training their PvP skills.
      Ugently needed if Albion hits the PlayStore.

      Also a nice content for us full loot pvp guys. Battles sounds epic and more red zones are exactly what we need.
      And a bigger Playerbase of trained PvP Players constantly joining Red/Black/Roads.

      But as mentioned an IP Cap in Blue/Yellow would be necessary. Maybe just open world and not in dungeons?
      All in All great Job. Keep it up.

      Im kinda hyped for the faction mounts!
      Small Scaler, Meuchelmörder & Notfall-Nature-Healer
      Proscriptus
      Ruhm und Ehre erwarten euch nur auf dem Schlachtfeld!
    • Ragazzi, penso o credo che SBI stia cercando di rendere il pvp il più equilibrato possibile,nel senso che il ganking non è considerato una forma equilibrata di pvp, e spesso molti giocatori, specialmente quelli appena registrati, possono essere molto cattivi riguardo morire e perdere tutto perché non hanno la possibilità di riacquistare le loro apparecchiature e quindi SBI sta creando zone sicure per loro T4 / T5 il resto è tutto bottino pieno pvp. Semplicemente le persone interessate al bottino completo devono trasferirsi in T6 non è un grosso problema. Che siano fazioni o no. I nuovi HG accessibili alle mappe sono un'ulteriore spinta al bilanciamento del pvp 5v5 10v10 e così via. La fazione ZvZ ci sarà ma in zona 6 con rischi ancora maggiori. E nuove opportunità pvp. Fondamentalmente, per come la vedo io, SBI sta dicendo "se vuoi mettere in gruppo 10 contro 1 un giocatore che si è appena unito o un giocatore che si sposta dalla zona t5 a t6 per giocare questo non accadrà mai più ". E se il numero di giocatori aumenterà ancora vuol dire che è la scelta giusta. Le aree T4 / T5 devono essere considerate aree sicure per apprendere le meccaniche di gioco e poi spostarsi in aree più pericolose avendo una buona o discreta conoscenza del gioco e capitali sufficienti per riacquistare le proprie armi o attrezzature senza pensare di lasciare il gioco.
    • New

      Phosphia wrote:

      stkmro wrote:

      The way I look at it...

      Introducing more instanced activities and going more retreat in pvp is synonymous with population growth.
      Back in the day, open world (statics+boss zones) was 90+% of all FF. Today it represents less than 1% as it basically doesn't even exist.
      Yes, and it was PRETTY boring, all dungeons were the SAME, and good luck getting to a good dungeon if you weren't on a guild with some relevance, and even then you shared a spot in the dungeon and just went in circles.

      We have improved a lot since then

      Gryffyth:Toma tu arma y síguenos en discord.gg/ktrNXWN
    • New

      Obelis wrote:




      In support of that is providing a low risk, inclusive environment where players can try out PvP without breaking their banks. This also allows players to become comfortable with the idea of PvP, while simultaneously forming bonds with other Faction members to both strengthen their Faction identity, as well as provide them with allies for the future.
      So, how about giving new players a soulbound status in which they can retain T4 and below items on death in faction pvp until they reach friendly rank with at least 1 faction. Maybe even indicate this status with an altered icon highlighting to friendly and hostile players that the player is unexperienced and will not drop loot?

      I just feel like reducing the effective size of true faction warfare map while creating pockets with special rules will be confusing and end up with various loopholes experienced players will take advantage of, one example would be tricking/forcing new players into red zones and ganking them (like people already do to AFK people in yellow zones).