Town Portal - QoL Suggestion (-> see new thread)

  • @Oshien please see my assessment from the other thread below, it also gives you some background info on our thinking here. In short, what we want to achieve is more active Outlands and hence more genuine ganking opportunities while nerfing camping. (with the exception of transports from A to B, which can still be camped just as before).

    Korn wrote:

    Hey there and thanks for the feedback so far.

    First of all, note that the concept above does not help people who want to transport gear from a city or hideout to another city or hideout. Hence, it has 0 impact on Albion's local economy or the importance of transport. This is extremely important for us.

    Now, let's look at the intended scenario. I'm a solo or small group player located in a city (or hideout) and want to do an open world gathering or PvE run and then return back to where I started from. Here is how this would work:
    1. I start in a city and venture out into the Outlands
    2. Once I am at my desired location, I gather and/or PvE
    3. Once my inventory is full (or once I want to do something else) I go back to the city that I came from. It is this step that gets cut short by the "town portal" feature.
    So what about the risk levels in each step? The risk consist of my gear that I am wearing and the new gear/resources that I am collecting on my trip.

    In step 1, my gear at risk is just my starting gear
    In step 2, it's my starting gear and the stuff that I have collected until then (say, on average, it's 50% of what I am going to collect)
    In step 3, it is my starting gear and 100% of what I collected during my trip.

    In terms of time spent for each step (happy to get your input there) it's fair to say that step 2 takes significantly longer than step 1. Let's roughly assume that of the total time spent in the Outlands when going out on one of these solo play sessions, 10% of my time is spent on my way there, 10% on my way back and 80% actually playing (such as 3 minutes traveling there, 24 minutes playing, 3 minutes travelling back)

    Even if such a QoL feature would not have an impact on how many players go into the Outlands and how much time they spent there, the risk reduction would only equal to at most 20% of the materials that you loot or gather during your run. (math is a bit more tricky here - average of 50% of your looted gear is at risk 80% of time in step 2 (80*50 = 4000), and 100% of your looted/gathered gear is at risk 10% of the time in step 3 (100*10 = 1000) - if you take step 3 away, it's a 20% reduction of the total (1000 out of a total of 5000). If we assume that on average the gear that you have gathered or looted in our inventory is worth, say, 50% of the gear that you wear, the overall risk reduction is around 7%. (if you assume that your gathered / looted gear is on average worth the same as the gear you have brought with you, it would be 10%)

    Now, from a ganker's point of view, if the above change results in more than 7% more time spent in the Outlands, it's a clear gain in terms of how much loot from other players is up for grabs. While the loot per successful kill would be slightly lower, there will be far more opportunities to score one.

    The added activity in the Outlands - and hence extra ganking opportunities - will easily exceed that number. Here is why:
    • The added convenience and saved time will make the open world more attractive in general. Players who are already regularly playing in the Outlands will on average spend more time in them
    • For newer players - including those who generally like full loot PvP - getting killed on your way back to the city by a large group zone camping is probably the most significant rage quit events in Albion Online right now. Tons of players - a significant amount of who we are sure would have "graduated" to permanent full loot PvP eventually - never got the chance to do so. Note that we consider is part of our key mission to help players as much as we can to make a successful transition from the blue zones to the Outlands - that is why we have yellow zones, a red zone reputation system, faction warfare without full loot, an arena without full loot, and so on. Allowing people to go that path is one of the key reasons why Albion is successful. Every time we succeed in making this work another active Outland player is added to the game.
    The above factors combined should easily increase Outland activity by significantly more than the risk reduction due to the added safety, I would say by at least 20%.

    In addition to that, we prefer organic PvP that happens in the open world when people are out for PvE, PvP, gathering or fighting over objectives, it's more varied and more fun and on average leads to much fairer encounters. We never liked or wanted to encourage static zone camps, it's just an unintended consequence of the cluster system. Mechanics that we introduced to curtail it - such as the shrine system and the attempt to provide lots of entrances to the cities - are unfortunately not that effective.
  • The impact to the economy is that it will see prices of everything drop. Raw materials, refined materials (as a result of raw prices) and crafted gear. This proposed change significantly benefits alliances that own territories (for TP safety) and can easily be abused by those with access to HOs.

    Scenario 1.
    I go to my crafting HO and load up on the guilds items for transport. I lose my "free TP lock". I have a guild mate who still has TP lock. I trade all the items and they TP back to town for free with the 100s of millions of silver in gear. Entire guilds/alliances can now transport their BZ loot safely to the royals. In theory everyone can now have Royals TP alts who do this "magic move" (yes i know this last one is against TOS, but cant be policed).

    Scenario 2.
    Gank/Gather group go do BZ content and people are at capacity. They all trade to "TP mules" who TP back to the Royals with the valuable gear, while the remainder run back to town or continue their content. This can then be repeated as those in the group can simply rotate their TPs back to town.


    @Korn I get the change is designed to benefit solo and small group players, and is a means to mitigate the power projection of HO. The proposed change is a bad one and will be exploited in many ways, especially as detailed in both scenarios above.

    If this feature is at least implemented into the current or future reworked Roads/Mists, this will be a massive QoL enhancement. The randomness and risk of losing home lock is what deters a lot of people from venturing deep into Roads/Mists.

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

  • Korn wrote:

    Hey there,

    Our main goal with this feature is to have more ganking but less camping. As stated in the op - to stop large groups of gankers camping entrances to catch (often newer) players on the way back to town. We want ganking to be dynamic and happen in the open world and not in front of entrances. We want to bring more people into the Outlands overall, which will lead to more ganking opportunities in general, while at the same time being a nerf to camping.
    You have not considered the knock on effects of this, to resolve such a none issue, it is incredibly easily to pass in and out of portal zones without getting ganked if you just engage more than 1 brain cell. I pass in/out multiple times every day and i was last ganked in like...... 2021? idk.

    You've asked the albion playerbase if they want the suggestion, they have literally given you 18 pages of negative comments telling you they dont want it, and how easily exploitable it is, and you have ignored that feedback and gone ahead with it anyway, well.. all i can say is good luck to you if this is how you intend to listen to your playerbase, you wont have one for much longer.

    Let me give you some easily exploitable scenario's just to show exactly how game breaking and stupid this addition is.

    lets start with power projection, yes we had a huge problem with power projection destroying the gameplay didnt we? so much so you had to totally rework hideouts and home setting to fix the issue, people able to run across the map fight a battle then be on the other end of the map again to fight another battle?

    guess what? i can now zone into a hideout, run across the blackzone to fight a battle, then simply teleport back to that hideout ready for the next battle/defense again... GOOD JOB

    what about the stuff that makes albion enjoyable? ah yes the risk vs reward system, the adrenaline and thrill of moving your sweet haul back through the blackzone able to be jumped at any moment!

    guess what? Thats gone, we will just teleport it instead no risk, massive reward..... GOOD JOB

    then we have the juicy stuff like castle loot, big 8,3 kills, maybe a nice crystal battlemount or a transport mammoth? wow man the only thing that gets the blood flowing more than catching these targets is getting it out again afterwards!

    guess what? yea thats gone too, just teleport it back.

    i could go on all day with a list of things that are ruined and things that can be exploited, but as you have clearly shown with this change you wont listen anyway.

    all i can do is summarise what the larger part of your playerbase is thinking and say SBI, GIVE YOUR HEAD A WOBBLE!!!!!
  • Once as a gatherer I talked to a ganker who had millions of PvP fame after running away and got answered "you're just a gatherer with nothing so idc" which makes me think that there's more worth loot that those of gatherers. It was in Avalonian Roads, where one avalonian portal led to a portal zone in the outlands and another one to somewhere in the middle of the outlands, distances away - so I assume it was a transporting route and the ganker mainly intended to loot transports.

    On this scenario alone, I started thinking that transporters are potentially much more worth than gatherers during gathering. If this is true, then I don't think gankers would be discouraged from static ganking if they mainly intend to rob transporters, especially when everything gatherer carries will drop on value.
  • This thing is very bad...

    Ok this can help who gather, but you remove all risk from game

    And Albion is about risk, you go far to do your content and need come back to safe place

    When you put something like this on game you kill content.

    Plus if you start put restrictions dont make sense have this tool

    Its like, now without more infos i can think in:
    - Put a Morgana Chest out from HO and TELEPORT BACK
    - Take loot from castles and TELEPORT BACK
    - Loot some juice gear and TELEPORT BACK
    - Loot some good chest on open world and TELEPORT BACK
    - Put itens on Siege Camp and TELEPORT BACK

    And probably have more situations that people can think to abuse about this and TELEPORT BACK

    its like "you cant teleport if have a zerg close to you", but you can go to some corner on map or zone to another map and TELEPORT BACK

    Black Zone is about one lose to other win, when you put TELEPORT BACK you remove this situation

    This sounds like "let game more easy to new players" then other thing...

    #NOTELEPORTBACK

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

  • noxmortus wrote:

    The impact to the economy is that it will see prices of everything drop. Raw materials, refined materials (as a result of raw prices) and crafted gear. This proposed change significantly benefits alliances that own territories (for TP safety) and can easily be abused by those with access to HOs.

    Scenario 1.
    I go to my crafting HO and load up on the guilds items for transport. I lose my "free TP lock". I have a guild mate who still has TP lock. I trade all the items and they TP back to town for free with the 100s of millions of silver in gear. Entire guilds/alliances can now transport their BZ loot safely to the royals. In theory everyone can now have Royals TP alts who do this "magic move" (yes i know this last one is against TOS, but cant be policed).

    Scenario 2.
    Gank/Gather group go do BZ content and people are at capacity. They all trade to "TP mules" who TP back to the Royals with the valuable gear, while the remainder run back to town or continue their content. This can then be repeated as those in the group can simply rotate their TPs back to town.


    @Korn I get the change is designed to benefit solo and small group players, and is a means to mitigate the power projection of HO. The proposed change is a bad one and will be exploited in many ways, especially as detailed in both scenarios above.

    If this feature is at least implemented into the current or future reworked Roads/Mists, this will be a massive QoL enhancement. The randomness and risk of losing home lock is what deters a lot of people from venturing deep into Roads/Mists.
    Your scenarios won't apply, trading disables the Teleport.
  • Jean_Helius wrote:

    Quagga wrote:

    They added a teleport, hah community opinions don't matter though.
    Most players don't even know about this forum., this is just a bunch of old players who don't want to see Albion changing. Everything that makes Albion more friendly for new players is a win in my opinion, i hope this will eventually increase the "community".
    Buddy if you want to increase the community just start looking at the game’s accessibility, the only ways to play it is on expensive PC’s, laptops that most have no good processing engines, and some pretty expensive beefy mobile devices (since your everyday use iPhone doesn’t really cut it for almost perfect game play. Albion Online should go ahead and expand to consoles so that the few players that have kind of lagged behind with a terrible mobile device or trashy laptop can just hop onto their PlayStation, Xbox, or Nintendo Switch. And most people have one of these consoles in their house to play a couple games on. With this expansion with would also be a huge thing that would be a free MMORPG that goes straight to the console’s shop, and imma tell you the Nintendo Switch Eshop, let’s just go ahead and put it out there it garbage. Nintendo has like no good free game that are not complete beast machine FPS game or games that are to big for the normal Switch. So I mean if Albion Online came to Switch that would be an easy couple thousand players that are looking for a new free game that doesn’t require much of your system to play on. And I mean if Albion Online can pretty much be ran on a mobile device then consoles will do much much better. Yes in the most recent dev talk they said “we are looking into making the game more accessible to players”, which most likely means they are looking into and working on the console expansion. So if you want to say hopefully this will increase the “community” look forward to the console release, that will expand the viewing of the game expedentially.
  • Korn wrote:

    @Oshien please see my assessment from the other thread below, it also gives you some background info on our thinking here. In short, what we want to achieve is more active Outlands and hence more genuine ganking opportunities while nerfing camping. (with the exception of transports from A to B, which can still be camped just as before).

    Korn wrote:

    Hey there and thanks for the feedback so far.

    First of all, note that the concept above does not help people who want to transport gear from a city or hideout to another city or hideout. Hence, it has 0 impact on Albion's local economy or the importance of transport. This is extremely important for us.

    Now, let's look at the intended scenario. I'm a solo or small group player located in a city (or hideout) and want to do an open world gathering or PvE run and then return back to where I started from. Here is how this would work:
    1. I start in a city and venture out into the Outlands
    2. Once I am at my desired location, I gather and/or PvE
    3. Once my inventory is full (or once I want to do something else) I go back to the city that I came from. It is this step that gets cut short by the "town portal" feature.
    So what about the risk levels in each step? The risk consist of my gear that I am wearing and the new gear/resources that I am collecting on my trip.

    In step 1, my gear at risk is just my starting gear
    In step 2, it's my starting gear and the stuff that I have collected until then (say, on average, it's 50% of what I am going to collect)
    In step 3, it is my starting gear and 100% of what I collected during my trip.

    In terms of time spent for each step (happy to get your input there) it's fair to say that step 2 takes significantly longer than step 1. Let's roughly assume that of the total time spent in the Outlands when going out on one of these solo play sessions, 10% of my time is spent on my way there, 10% on my way back and 80% actually playing (such as 3 minutes traveling there, 24 minutes playing, 3 minutes travelling back)

    Even if such a QoL feature would not have an impact on how many players go into the Outlands and how much time they spent there, the risk reduction would only equal to at most 20% of the materials that you loot or gather during your run. (math is a bit more tricky here - average of 50% of your looted gear is at risk 80% of time in step 2 (80*50 = 4000), and 100% of your looted/gathered gear is at risk 10% of the time in step 3 (100*10 = 1000) - if you take step 3 away, it's a 20% reduction of the total (1000 out of a total of 5000). If we assume that on average the gear that you have gathered or looted in our inventory is worth, say, 50% of the gear that you wear, the overall risk reduction is around 7%. (if you assume that your gathered / looted gear is on average worth the same as the gear you have brought with you, it would be 10%)

    Now, from a ganker's point of view, if the above change results in more than 7% more time spent in the Outlands, it's a clear gain in terms of how much loot from other players is up for grabs. While the loot per successful kill would be slightly lower, there will be far more opportunities to score one.

    The added activity in the Outlands - and hence extra ganking opportunities - will easily exceed that number. Here is why:
    • The added convenience and saved time will make the open world more attractive in general. Players who are already regularly playing in the Outlands will on average spend more time in them
    • For newer players - including those who generally like full loot PvP - getting killed on your way back to the city by a large group zone camping is probably the most significant rage quit events in Albion Online right now. Tons of players - a significant amount of who we are sure would have "graduated" to permanent full loot PvP eventually - never got the chance to do so. Note that we consider is part of our key mission to help players as much as we can to make a successful transition from the blue zones to the Outlands - that is why we have yellow zones, a red zone reputation system, faction warfare without full loot, an arena without full loot, and so on. Allowing people to go that path is one of the key reasons why Albion is successful. Every time we succeed in making this work another active Outland player is added to the game.
    The above factors combined should easily increase Outland activity by significantly more than the risk reduction due to the added safety, I would say by at least 20%.

    In addition to that, we prefer organic PvP that happens in the open world when people are out for PvE, PvP, gathering or fighting over objectives, it's more varied and more fun and on average leads to much fairer encounters. We never liked or wanted to encourage static zone camps, it's just an unintended consequence of the cluster system. Mechanics that we introduced to curtail it - such as the shrine system and the attempt to provide lots of entrances to the cities - are unfortunately not that effective.

    I appreciate the thought that has gone into this but myself and a lot (most?) of the community believe you all are wrong. Anyone who wants to be in the blackzone is here. It is easy to get in and out of the portal zones with minimal effort. So many issues will come from this and very little would be accomplished. If there are not enough portals and they can be camped... just add more portals or ways into and out of portal zones. Any safety system you try to put in will be exploited to a negative effect on the game.
    Don't go away mad, just go away...
  • Korn wrote:

    Hey there and thanks for the feedback so far.

    First of all, note that the concept above does not help people who want to transport gear from a city or hideout to another city or hideout. Hence, it has 0 impact on Albion's local economy or the importance of transport. This is extremely important for us.

    Now, let's look at the intended scenario. I'm a solo or small group player located in a city (or hideout) and want to do an open world gathering or PvE run and then return back to where I started from. Here is how this would work:
    1. I start in a city and venture out into the Outlands
    2. Once I am at my desired location, I gather and/or PvE
    3. Once my inventory is full (or once I want to do something else) I go back to the city that I came from. It is this step that gets cut short by the "town portal" feature.
    So what about the risk levels in each step? The risk consist of my gear that I am wearing and the new gear/resources that I am collecting on my trip.

    In step 1, my gear at risk is just my starting gear
    In step 2, it's my starting gear and the stuff that I have collected until then (say, on average, it's 50% of what I am going to collect)
    In step 3, it is my starting gear and 100% of what I collected during my trip.

    In terms of time spent for each step (happy to get your input there) it's fair to say that step 2 takes significantly longer than step 1. Let's roughly assume that of the total time spent in the Outlands when going out on one of these solo play sessions, 10% of my time is spent on my way there, 10% on my way back and 80% actually playing (such as 3 minutes traveling there, 24 minutes playing, 3 minutes travelling back)

    Even if such a QoL feature would not have an impact on how many players go into the Outlands and how much time they spent there, the risk reduction would only equal to at most 20% of the materials that you loot or gather during your run. (math is a bit more tricky here - average of 50% of your looted gear is at risk 80% of time in step 2 (80*50 = 4000), and 100% of your looted/gathered gear is at risk 10% of the time in step 3 (100*10 = 1000) - if you take step 3 away, it's a 20% reduction of the total (1000 out of a total of 5000). If we assume that on average the gear that you have gathered or looted in our inventory is worth, say, 50% of the gear that you wear, the overall risk reduction is around 7%. (if you assume that your gathered / looted gear is on average worth the same as the gear you have brought with you, it would be 10%)

    Now, from a ganker's point of view, if the above change results in more than 7% more time spent in the Outlands, it's a clear gain in terms of how much loot from other players is up for grabs. While the loot per successful kill would be slightly lower, there will be far more opportunities to score one.

    The added activity in the Outlands - and hence extra ganking opportunities - will easily exceed that number. Here is why:
    • The added convenience and saved time will make the open world more attractive in general. Players who are already regularly playing in the Outlands will on average spend more time in them
    • For newer players - including those who generally like full loot PvP - getting killed on your way back to the city by a large group zone camping is probably the most significant rage quit events in Albion Online right now. Tons of players - a significant amount of who we are sure would have "graduated" to permanent full loot PvP eventually - never got the chance to do so. Note that we consider is part of our key mission to help players as much as we can to make a successful transition from the blue zones to the Outlands - that is why we have yellow zones, a red zone reputation system, faction warfare without full loot, an arena without full loot, and so on. Allowing people to go that path is one of the key reasons why Albion is successful. Every time we succeed in making this work another active Outland player is added to the game.
    The above factors combined should easily increase Outland activity by significantly more than the risk reduction due to the added safety, I would say by at least 20%.

    In addition to that, we prefer organic PvP that happens in the open world when people are out for PvE, PvP, gathering or fighting over objectives, it's more varied and more fun and on average leads to much fairer encounters. We never liked or wanted to encourage static zone camps, it's just an unintended consequence of the cluster system. Mechanics that we introduced to curtail it - such as the shrine system and the attempt to provide lots of entrances to the cities - are unfortunately not that effective.
    Talk about numbers without show to us this numbers for real mean NOTHING!

    But lets talk about your GANK GROUP point, a lot of times when Gank group go back to city they have change to gank more and make more loot, and when they come back to black zone is same thing, so dont use this excuse pls.

    And all this is about NEW PLAYERS quiting from game, you already told this.

    So just be honest please.

    You putting a new tool to new players stop cry and dont go out from game.

    You will have a TONS of players doing TELEPORT BACK and gankers will only gank who is running on maps, so please your points dont mean nothing.

    You want put more people on Black Zone, yea this will work, and will stop here. People go to black zone and TELEPORT BACK.

    Is like i cant teleport betewen my HOs NAKED, but now i can TELEPORT BACK to city. WHAAAAT?

    What will be next step? No full pvp loot on black zone? So your new players will not quit from game

    Come on
  • BZ are already overcrowded by HO...

    teleport will not change anything, meme flat 4 gankers portal campers will still exist
    ( this is a problem in combat balance and not in game design)

    BM will be even more drained than now

    solo players can unistal game, meeting someone in OW and potential fights will drop by 50%~.

    The amount of resources that barely exist now will be even less.
    (let's wait for gathering tomes)

    objective and potential profit for solo player will stop existing, someone drop 8.3 item BOOM teleport.


    does not improve and immerse new players to learn the game and mechanics
    (same as people who get dmg and still spam the mount button)

    no matter how many mechanics you add, bubble zone, invis shrine,HO,HQ now teleport, always the same players will find a reason to complain and push the limits to absurd level.
  • LootGoblin wrote:

    noxmortus wrote:

    The impact to the economy is that it will see prices of everything drop. Raw materials, refined materials (as a result of raw prices) and crafted gear. This proposed change significantly benefits alliances that own territories (for TP safety) and can easily be abused by those with access to HOs.

    Scenario 1.
    I go to my crafting HO and load up on the guilds items for transport. I lose my "free TP lock". I have a guild mate who still has TP lock. I trade all the items and they TP back to town for free with the 100s of millions of silver in gear. Entire guilds/alliances can now transport their BZ loot safely to the royals. In theory everyone can now have Royals TP alts who do this "magic move" (yes i know this last one is against TOS, but cant be policed).

    Scenario 2.
    Gank/Gather group go do BZ content and people are at capacity. They all trade to "TP mules" who TP back to the Royals with the valuable gear, while the remainder run back to town or continue their content. This can then be repeated as those in the group can simply rotate their TPs back to town.


    @Korn I get the change is designed to benefit solo and small group players, and is a means to mitigate the power projection of HO. The proposed change is a bad one and will be exploited in many ways, especially as detailed in both scenarios above.

    If this feature is at least implemented into the current or future reworked Roads/Mists, this will be a massive QoL enhancement. The randomness and risk of losing home lock is what deters a lot of people from venturing deep into Roads/Mists.
    Your scenarios won't apply, trading disables the Teleport.
    @LootGoblin Great, but is that not a breach of your NDA? As that is not mentioned anywhere in public information.
  • I'm a new player who lives in a BZ rest. This sounds like it's meant to help people like me. Please don't do it. It would make living in the BZ as a beginner solo player 100x easier for me yea, but it would also rip the guts out of why "black zone" matters to me at all.

    Why not just increase the frequency of BZ-->Royal connections in the Roads instead? That would coax new players into the BZ, give them ways back home, and increase content in the roads. Worried about that cutting down on overland large-scale caravans or something? Make the connections more frequent in the small-gate roads only. There are other ways to do this.

    Funny thing is, if the teleport thing happens, I could see it causing a serious increase in gate-camping near the portal zones. If there's a real influx of people doing day-trips, and you can't grab them on the way back home, catch them coming in right? Nobody has loot yet, but they'll all be wearing some kind of gear set...

    Your game, run it how you want, but I think this change would lose you money and make the game worse.
  • noxmortus wrote:

    LootGoblin wrote:

    noxmortus wrote:

    The impact to the economy is that it will see prices of everything drop. Raw materials, refined materials (as a result of raw prices) and crafted gear. This proposed change significantly benefits alliances that own territories (for TP safety) and can easily be abused by those with access to HOs.

    Scenario 1.
    I go to my crafting HO and load up on the guilds items for transport. I lose my "free TP lock". I have a guild mate who still has TP lock. I trade all the items and they TP back to town for free with the 100s of millions of silver in gear. Entire guilds/alliances can now transport their BZ loot safely to the royals. In theory everyone can now have Royals TP alts who do this "magic move" (yes i know this last one is against TOS, but cant be policed).

    Scenario 2.
    Gank/Gather group go do BZ content and people are at capacity. They all trade to "TP mules" who TP back to the Royals with the valuable gear, while the remainder run back to town or continue their content. This can then be repeated as those in the group can simply rotate their TPs back to town.


    @Korn I get the change is designed to benefit solo and small group players, and is a means to mitigate the power projection of HO. The proposed change is a bad one and will be exploited in many ways, especially as detailed in both scenarios above.

    If this feature is at least implemented into the current or future reworked Roads/Mists, this will be a massive QoL enhancement. The randomness and risk of losing home lock is what deters a lot of people from venturing deep into Roads/Mists.
    Your scenarios won't apply, trading disables the Teleport.
    @LootGoblin Great, but is that not a breach of your NDA? As that is not mentioned anywhere in public information.
    Its literally in the first post if you read it...
  • I don't understand why portal gankers are a problem to be solved???

    With the invis shrines you cannot get ganked on the portal zone, so if you think that it's a problem that new players get ganked in portal zones, why don't you invest into improving the new player experience instead of changing one of the fundamental aspects of albion???

    The only time I got ganked in the portal zone was when I forgot I couldn't reapply the invis buff, and that still involved stupidly standing at the shrine for 10 seconds.
  • I didn't read most of the post cause I'm very tipsy.

    What I think is that (based on my experience) this will incentivize more people to adventure deeper into the black zones (t7, t8 maps)

    People who manage to find solo dungeons, or open world challenges will be highly rewarder for the risk of adventuring so deeply into the black zones.

    But gankers will be there waiting for us.

    This is what an almost drunk guy thinks
  • Korn wrote:

    @Oshien please see my assessment from the other thread below, it also gives you some background info on our thinking here. In short, what we want to achieve is more active Outlands and hence more genuine ganking opportunities while nerfing camping. (with the exception of transports from A to B, which can still be camped just as before).
    @Korn just posting to point our the similarities between the logic here of 'If we make the outlands safer, more people will go in the outlands so it will be offset by the extra players' and the logic you used of 'If we make it harder to dive dungeons, more people will run dungeons so it will be offset by the extra players' before the roads patch.

    This turned out to be massively untrue for the dungeon case and basically killed one of the small-scale forms of content available to a couple of mates playing together, and I don't see any reason to imagine that this change would do anything other than significantly reduce the amount of players you encounter in the open world.(edit - especially smaller groups / duo's)

    You also mentioned the changes to shrines / bubble zones around the gates being ineffective, but I can't remember the last time I died in a realmgate zone. They were extremely effective as long as you understood the mechanics, which is a good thing because it means there's a learning curve and you're rewarded for getting better at the game.

    In terms of the 'horse simulator / walking simulator' sentiment - I think the time this applies the least is when you're returning home with an inventory full of loot, since you're focused / aware of your surroundings and engaged in making sure you make it home safe. The running simulator stuff relates to all the time spent roaming around looking for something to do and not finding anything (see also all the dead ends in Ava's making you retrace your steps through multiple zones that had nothing to do in them). It especially stands out when you're playing as 2-4 people, since you'll mostly find 10+ player parties that you need to evade anyway and just keep running on...

    The transport change as written removes the least boring part of the travelling, while either not touching or making the pain points of actually looking for content worse.

    Fwiw, because of the issues with running around in the roads, I wouldn't object to a different fast travel system implemented specifically for the roads, but there's likely a better solution there too (shrink them, make less zones, put more stuff in them)

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

  • Instead of adding a teleport to combat camping, why don't you just nerf gate camping itself? Make a larger radius for teleporting between zones, OR add more entrances between zones. With a larger radius, you'd make it nearly impossible to portal camp effectively with a small group since the choke point is so large. And with multiple different entrances to zones, you'd need to split up your gank forces up to try to cover all entrances. If we had 3 different connections between zones, if a gatherer sees a gate camp group, they could just walk to a different gate.