Any Dev Response to the public outcry against Caerleon/Hector?

  • FireRunner wrote:

    Dragnon wrote:

    ntall1 wrote:

    Tabor wrote:

    Not fully understanding the perspective of the folks complaining about portals. Do you really find it more entertaining to mindlessly run 10 zones to get to the port followed by then potentially running another 4-5 zones to hit your desired zone? The previous system was tedious and caused all folks not living in black to not bother. Now the Caerleon portal system minimizes the dead travel time and more people can spend the time playing the game. Black zones are still popping with constant PvP and people.
    Not sure anyone made the claim the old port system was great. The claim is the solution to it was very poor.
    The game went from being a sandbox open world to being a series of instances and warps for instant action. I suppose that's better for tablet players which....if you think about it....this game is really designed for primarily.
    What tablet players? This game won't be on mobile for I bet at last a year! LOL. And by that time the game may be dead.
    Define "dead". It will be up and running and have a core player base in 12 months. Ill bet 100k gold on that.
  • postlarval wrote:

    Roor wrote:

    Korn wrote:

    We are happy to respond to this.

    Be warned though that those critical about the update won't like the response.

    Note that when you say "public outcry" over the changes, it's far from it. Every change that has the potential to be controversial will always trigger a decently sized thread from those who are against it. The fact alone that such a thread exists is not an indicator that a change was bad. I can assure you that if we changed the system back from Caerleon to how it was before, the resulting negative thread would easily be 5-10 times larger.

    The main goals of the Caerleon rework were as follows:
    • Make the Outlands more accessible and increase activity in the Outlands
    • Make the red zones more accessible and increase activity in the red zones
    • Have a clear blue <-> yellow <-> red <-> black trade route, and make trade about danger rather than distance traveled
    These goals were formulated based on extensive beta testing. Memory is often selected, so a lot of players will have forgotten how the situation was in Beta 1 and Beta 2. Outland cities never worked. They were never really populated, and never hard a working market in them. Overall accessibility and population density in the Outlands was terrible. One of the most received complaints received was lack of action and activity in the Outlands. The barrier to entry for non-territory holding guilds to venture/roam the Outlands were drastic.

    Based on our evaluation and supporting data, the Caerleon rework was a great success and achieved its stated goals.

    Now, I know that the reaction to this response is going to be from those who do not like the Caerleon change: "The devs are stupid/dense, they ignore the community and don't listen to feedback" This however, is not the case. We are listening, we are evaluating, we have evaluated and are convinced - taking all info into account - that the current set-up is much better than how it was before. Listening to feedback is different from agreeing with it.
    I love how you always come here and denounce the majority of public feedback, without providing any numbers or evidence to support this claim, simply you just say its not true.Lets talk about your data. Your data is wrong and has always been wrong due to improper collection and testing. You changed the control map each time you made a change based on the previous control map. Which is absolutely retarded. No one does this. If you told a 7th grader in science class you did this they would laugh at you. Again, no one does this. This is why your data is flawed and always has been flawed.

    Where are these trade routes you speak of Korn? Are you talking about the pathetic 1 and 1/2 zones from yellow cities to red cities? You consider that successful trade run routes? The bar must not be set very high, in fact it must be at the ankles. Quite pathetic. Make it about danger versus distance traveled? You actually made it shorter and less dangerous is your brain so small you cant see that? I run naked alts with millions of silver worth of items without escort or worry. But yea dude! totally dangerous!

    Where are the trade runs from red to black and back again? Where are they? I dont see any. In fact territories have been mostly used to just farm resources, make resources, and stash those resources in the black zone territory. They do not export these goods, they are for the guild and alliance. So where are these trade runs?

    Cearleon is a failure and a great blunder. You made it so you want to say, "Mission Accomplished!" when in reality you failed and dont want to admit it. Lets see some of that sick data backing your claims though!
    Says the guy calling SI out for lack of data and then claiming Cearleon is a failure without any data.
    The burden of proof isnt his to prove. Its theirs. They keep claiming data backs their claims but never release any. I agree with RooR on this one.
  • Personally IDK much about the numbers. The map is tiny, exploration is gone, they wanted to remove portals then added expeditions, killed solo dungeons, over world mobs are a joke, etc. I love this game. I don't want another game. I cetainly don't want an open world game that has a boring open world. It just become a very simplistic game thats not immersive. Not only are we back in what feels like a beta the adventure is gone. Ppl didn't want a 10 zone run....ok then localize. Every town is just the same stuff, same prices, etc. Ppl not wanting to travel 10 zones? Great! A merchant now has a place. It simply feels as if we have moved 5000 steps backwards.

    That and no news on whats ahead to give one hope.
  • Raithe wrote:

    Personally IDK much about the numbers. The map is tiny, exploration is gone, they wanted to remove portals then added expeditions, killed solo dungeons, over world mobs are a joke, etc. I love this game. I don't want another game. I cetainly don't want an open world game that has a boring open world. It just become a very simplistic game thats not immersive. Not only are we back in what feels like a beta the adventure is gone. Ppl didn't want a 10 zone run....ok then localize. Every town is just the same stuff, same prices, etc. Ppl not wanting to travel 10 zones? Great! A merchant now has a place. It simply feels as if we have moved 5000 steps backwards.

    That and no news on whats ahead to give one hope.
    I saw this post on reddit and it sums it up pretty nice.

    reddit.com/r/albiononline/comm…_online_heres_my/dlnqmtx/

    Korn can say all he wants, obviously the player base feels different and views the game differently. If this game tanks in 2 months It would be safe to say Korn played a major factor in the failure of AO because of his refusal to listen to feedback because he wants to further his narrative and agenda. He needs to be relevant so he doesnt get fired. Unfortunately for him the best thing for AO is to remove him and his ideology from the game.
  • Raithe wrote:

    Personally IDK much about the numbers. The map is tiny, exploration is gone, they wanted to remove portals then added expeditions, killed solo dungeons, over world mobs are a joke, etc. I love this game. I don't want another game. I cetainly don't want an open world game that has a boring open world. It just become a very simplistic game thats not immersive. Not only are we back in what feels like a beta the adventure is gone. Ppl didn't want a 10 zone run....ok then localize. Every town is just the same stuff, same prices, etc. Ppl not wanting to travel 10 zones? Great! A merchant now has a place. It simply feels as if we have moved 5000 steps backwards.

    That and no news on whats ahead to give one hope.
    Remember when I called all of this back in beta but kept being silenced, banned and censored. Told I was the minority viewpoint, told that it just wasnt true.

    Korn pretty much ruined any chances of AO succeeding because of he refuses to listen to any feedback that goes against what he designed. He is just a guy struggling to maintain the status quo because he has failed, and doesn't want the company to realize his ideas and views damaged this games potential to succeed.

    Its a losing battle for him either way. Just laugh and watch this ship sink while he says everything is good and his numbers back him up.
    The True Victor.

    Make Albion Great Again!
  • Korn wrote:

    We are happy to respond to this.

    Be warned though that those critical about the update won't like the response.

    Note that when you say "public outcry" over the changes, it's far from it. Every change that has the potential to be controversial will always trigger a decently sized thread from those who are against it. The fact alone that such a thread exists is not an indicator that a change was bad. I can assure you that if we changed the system back from Caerleon to how it was before, the resulting negative thread would easily be 5-10 times larger.

    The main goals of the Caerleon rework were as follows:
    • Make the Outlands more accessible and increase activity in the Outlands
    • Make the red zones more accessible and increase activity in the red zones
    • Have a clear blue <-> yellow <-> red <-> black trade route, and make trade about danger rather than distance traveled
    These goals were formulated based on extensive beta testing. Memory is often selected, so a lot of players will have forgotten how the situation was in Beta 1 and Beta 2. Outland cities never worked. They were never really populated, and never hard a working market in them. Overall accessibility and population density in the Outlands was terrible. One of the most received complaints received was lack of action and activity in the Outlands. The barrier to entry for non-territory holding guilds to venture/roam the Outlands were drastic.

    Based on our evaluation and supporting data, the Caerleon rework was a great success and achieved its stated goals.

    Now, I know that the reaction to this response is going to be from those who do not like the Caerleon change: "The devs are stupid/dense, they ignore the community and don't listen to feedback" This however, is not the case. We are listening, we are evaluating, we have evaluated and are convinced - taking all info into account - that the current set-up is much better than how it was before. Listening to feedback is different from agreeing with it.
    Thanks for your answer.

    I understand the problem that black zones were not populated. But this "fix" made the entire map useless and worthless to explore.
    What is the point of being in any other city except of Caerleon?
    As I said before, I think since the day 3 of the game I just play between black zones and Caerleon. Extremely boring.
  • Edipo wrote:

    Korn wrote:

    We are happy to respond to this.

    Be warned though that those critical about the update won't like the response.

    Note that when you say "public outcry" over the changes, it's far from it. Every change that has the potential to be controversial will always trigger a decently sized thread from those who are against it. The fact alone that such a thread exists is not an indicator that a change was bad. I can assure you that if we changed the system back from Caerleon to how it was before, the resulting negative thread would easily be 5-10 times larger.

    The main goals of the Caerleon rework were as follows:
    • Make the Outlands more accessible and increase activity in the Outlands
    • Make the red zones more accessible and increase activity in the red zones
    • Have a clear blue <-> yellow <-> red <-> black trade route, and make trade about danger rather than distance traveled
    These goals were formulated based on extensive beta testing. Memory is often selected, so a lot of players will have forgotten how the situation was in Beta 1 and Beta 2. Outland cities never worked. They were never really populated, and never hard a working market in them. Overall accessibility and population density in the Outlands was terrible. One of the most received complaints received was lack of action and activity in the Outlands. The barrier to entry for non-territory holding guilds to venture/roam the Outlands were drastic.

    Based on our evaluation and supporting data, the Caerleon rework was a great success and achieved its stated goals.

    Now, I know that the reaction to this response is going to be from those who do not like the Caerleon change: "The devs are stupid/dense, they ignore the community and don't listen to feedback" This however, is not the case. We are listening, we are evaluating, we have evaluated and are convinced - taking all info into account - that the current set-up is much better than how it was before. Listening to feedback is different from agreeing with it.
    Thanks for your answer.
    I understand the problem that black zones were not populated. But this "fix" made the entire map useless and worthless to explore.
    What is the point of being in any other city except of Caerleon?
    As I said before, I think since the day 3 of the game I just play between black zones and Caerleon. Extremely boring.
    Extremely boring is working as intended according to @Korn
    The True Victor.

    Make Albion Great Again!
  • Terrorsauce wrote:

    postlarval wrote:

    Roor wrote:

    Korn wrote:

    We are happy to respond to this.

    Be warned though that those critical about the update won't like the response.

    Note that when you say "public outcry" over the changes, it's far from it. Every change that has the potential to be controversial will always trigger a decently sized thread from those who are against it. The fact alone that such a thread exists is not an indicator that a change was bad. I can assure you that if we changed the system back from Caerleon to how it was before, the resulting negative thread would easily be 5-10 times larger.

    The main goals of the Caerleon rework were as follows:
    • Make the Outlands more accessible and increase activity in the Outlands
    • Make the red zones more accessible and increase activity in the red zones
    • Have a clear blue <-> yellow <-> red <-> black trade route, and make trade about danger rather than distance traveled
    These goals were formulated based on extensive beta testing. Memory is often selected, so a lot of players will have forgotten how the situation was in Beta 1 and Beta 2. Outland cities never worked. They were never really populated, and never hard a working market in them. Overall accessibility and population density in the Outlands was terrible. One of the most received complaints received was lack of action and activity in the Outlands. The barrier to entry for non-territory holding guilds to venture/roam the Outlands were drastic.

    Based on our evaluation and supporting data, the Caerleon rework was a great success and achieved its stated goals.

    Now, I know that the reaction to this response is going to be from those who do not like the Caerleon change: "The devs are stupid/dense, they ignore the community and don't listen to feedback" This however, is not the case. We are listening, we are evaluating, we have evaluated and are convinced - taking all info into account - that the current set-up is much better than how it was before. Listening to feedback is different from agreeing with it.
    I love how you always come here and denounce the majority of public feedback, without providing any numbers or evidence to support this claim, simply you just say its not true.Lets talk about your data. Your data is wrong and has always been wrong due to improper collection and testing. You changed the control map each time you made a change based on the previous control map. Which is absolutely retarded. No one does this. If you told a 7th grader in science class you did this they would laugh at you. Again, no one does this. This is why your data is flawed and always has been flawed.
    Where are these trade routes you speak of Korn? Are you talking about the pathetic 1 and 1/2 zones from yellow cities to red cities? You consider that successful trade run routes? The bar must not be set very high, in fact it must be at the ankles. Quite pathetic. Make it about danger versus distance traveled? You actually made it shorter and less dangerous is your brain so small you cant see that? I run naked alts with millions of silver worth of items without escort or worry. But yea dude! totally dangerous!

    Where are the trade runs from red to black and back again? Where are they? I dont see any. In fact territories have been mostly used to just farm resources, make resources, and stash those resources in the black zone territory. They do not export these goods, they are for the guild and alliance. So where are these trade runs?

    Cearleon is a failure and a great blunder. You made it so you want to say, "Mission Accomplished!" when in reality you failed and dont want to admit it. Lets see some of that sick data backing your claims though!
    Says the guy calling SI out for lack of data and then claiming Cearleon is a failure without any data.
    The burden of proof isnt his to prove. Its theirs. They keep claiming data backs their claims but never release any. I agree with RooR on this one.
    *woosh*

    It's OK. Some row with large oars and other with smaller ones.

    Sorry about the size of your oars.
  • Dragnon wrote:

    FireRunner wrote:

    Dragnon wrote:

    ntall1 wrote:

    Tabor wrote:

    Not fully understanding the perspective of the folks complaining about portals. Do you really find it more entertaining to mindlessly run 10 zones to get to the port followed by then potentially running another 4-5 zones to hit your desired zone? The previous system was tedious and caused all folks not living in black to not bother. Now the Caerleon portal system minimizes the dead travel time and more people can spend the time playing the game. Black zones are still popping with constant PvP and people.
    Not sure anyone made the claim the old port system was great. The claim is the solution to it was very poor.
    The game went from being a sandbox open world to being a series of instances and warps for instant action. I suppose that's better for tablet players which....if you think about it....this game is really designed for primarily.
    What tablet players? This game won't be on mobile for I bet at last a year! LOL. And by that time the game may be dead.
    Define "dead". It will be up and running and have a core player base in 12 months. Ill bet 100k gold on that.
    I personally use android as my secondary device and the problems there are much much worse than with PC version. Its not even working atm so this game cannot be designed primarily to tablets.
    • Update feature does not work and you need to uninstall/reinstall game almost daily.
    • Sometimes you get blackscreen before login or you are stuck to connecting part (when pc version works fine).
    • Animations wont work and you just slide with horse and you know you are gathering or combating from backround sounds.
    • You cant change zone or you stuck to black screen.
    • Game crashes several times in an hour.
    Lsst time i checked it did not start anymore so i have stopped trying to use android version. ;)
  • Thomas9 wrote:

    Dragnon wrote:

    FireRunner wrote:

    Dragnon wrote:

    ntall1 wrote:

    Tabor wrote:

    Not fully understanding the perspective of the folks complaining about portals. Do you really find it more entertaining to mindlessly run 10 zones to get to the port followed by then potentially running another 4-5 zones to hit your desired zone? The previous system was tedious and caused all folks not living in black to not bother. Now the Caerleon portal system minimizes the dead travel time and more people can spend the time playing the game. Black zones are still popping with constant PvP and people.
    Not sure anyone made the claim the old port system was great. The claim is the solution to it was very poor.
    The game went from being a sandbox open world to being a series of instances and warps for instant action. I suppose that's better for tablet players which....if you think about it....this game is really designed for primarily.
    What tablet players? This game won't be on mobile for I bet at last a year! LOL. And by that time the game may be dead.
    Define "dead". It will be up and running and have a core player base in 12 months. Ill bet 100k gold on that.
    I personally use android as my secondary device and the problems there are much much worse than with PC version. Its not even working atm so this game cannot be designed primarily to tablets.
    • Update feature does not work and you need to uninstall/reinstall game almost daily.
    • Sometimes you get blackscreen before login or you are stuck to connecting part (when pc version works fine).
    • Animations wont work and you just slide with horse and you know you are gathering or combating from backround sounds.
    • You cant change zone or you stuck to black screen.
    • Game crashes several times in an hour.
    Lsst time i checked it did not start anymore so i have stopped trying to use android version. ;)
    This game is designed for tablets, in the long run. Just because the android version sucks at the moment doesn't define their intended design for the game. The evidence of this is all over the place.
  • Dragnon wrote:

    This game is designed for tablets, in the long run. Just because the android version sucks at the moment doesn't define their intended design for the game. The evidence of this is all over the place.
    Nah. If tablets would be the primary devices then that part would have more focus straight from the start. Problem with tablets comes ahead with combat. You cant compete against PC player and maybe if all PC players stops playing, after that tablets can be number one device, but not before that. If all PC players quit, mobile gaming wont save it in that point anymore. Its game over. Only evidence i see is that tablet version will not work atm and not in near future either.
  • @Korn

    Still no response to any concerns listed? I get you often have to repeat your reasons behind such changes but that is not a response to the concerns raised. The reasoning you decided to do something is not a response to ppls concerns about the affects of said changes, at least not a helpful response.

    Also its not 1 thread. Ppl are posting this stuff all over MANY threads.
  • Raithe wrote:

    @Korn

    Still no response to any concerns listed? I get you often have to repeat your reasons behind such changes but that is not a response to the concerns raised. The reasoning you decided to do something is not a response to ppls concerns about the affects of said changes, at least not a helpful response.

    Also its not 1 thread. Ppl are posting this stuff all over MANY threads.
    He gave the standard "1 reply per thread" nonsensical answer already. Why keep trying?

    After all, it's a massive success, didn't you hear? /s
  • postlarval wrote:

    Terrorsauce wrote:

    postlarval wrote:

    Roor wrote:

    Korn wrote:

    We are happy to respond to this.

    Be warned though that those critical about the update won't like the response.

    Note that when you say "public outcry" over the changes, it's far from it. Every change that has the potential to be controversial will always trigger a decently sized thread from those who are against it. The fact alone that such a thread exists is not an indicator that a change was bad. I can assure you that if we changed the system back from Caerleon to how it was before, the resulting negative thread would easily be 5-10 times larger.

    The main goals of the Caerleon rework were as follows:
    • Make the Outlands more accessible and increase activity in the Outlands
    • Make the red zones more accessible and increase activity in the red zones
    • Have a clear blue <-> yellow <-> red <-> black trade route, and make trade about danger rather than distance traveled
    These goals were formulated based on extensive beta testing. Memory is often selected, so a lot of players will have forgotten how the situation was in Beta 1 and Beta 2. Outland cities never worked. They were never really populated, and never hard a working market in them. Overall accessibility and population density in the Outlands was terrible. One of the most received complaints received was lack of action and activity in the Outlands. The barrier to entry for non-territory holding guilds to venture/roam the Outlands were drastic.

    Based on our evaluation and supporting data, the Caerleon rework was a great success and achieved its stated goals.

    Now, I know that the reaction to this response is going to be from those who do not like the Caerleon change: "The devs are stupid/dense, they ignore the community and don't listen to feedback" This however, is not the case. We are listening, we are evaluating, we have evaluated and are convinced - taking all info into account - that the current set-up is much better than how it was before. Listening to feedback is different from agreeing with it.
    I love how you always come here and denounce the majority of public feedback, without providing any numbers or evidence to support this claim, simply you just say its not true.Lets talk about your data. Your data is wrong and has always been wrong due to improper collection and testing. You changed the control map each time you made a change based on the previous control map. Which is absolutely retarded. No one does this. If you told a 7th grader in science class you did this they would laugh at you. Again, no one does this. This is why your data is flawed and always has been flawed.Where are these trade routes you speak of Korn? Are you talking about the pathetic 1 and 1/2 zones from yellow cities to red cities? You consider that successful trade run routes? The bar must not be set very high, in fact it must be at the ankles. Quite pathetic. Make it about danger versus distance traveled? You actually made it shorter and less dangerous is your brain so small you cant see that? I run naked alts with millions of silver worth of items without escort or worry. But yea dude! totally dangerous!

    Where are the trade runs from red to black and back again? Where are they? I dont see any. In fact territories have been mostly used to just farm resources, make resources, and stash those resources in the black zone territory. They do not export these goods, they are for the guild and alliance. So where are these trade runs?

    Cearleon is a failure and a great blunder. You made it so you want to say, "Mission Accomplished!" when in reality you failed and dont want to admit it. Lets see some of that sick data backing your claims though!
    Says the guy calling SI out for lack of data and then claiming Cearleon is a failure without any data.
    The burden of proof isnt his to prove. Its theirs. They keep claiming data backs their claims but never release any. I agree with RooR on this one.
    *woosh*
    It's OK. Some row with large oars and other with smaller ones.

    Sorry about the size of your oars.
    And some use a boat with an engine. You continue to try to be relevant in this post but continually get shut down by everyone. Rowing = losing.

    Ever get tired of losing? I wouldnt know what it feels like, so im asking.
    The True Victor.

    Make Albion Great Again!