Roadmap Update: Joseph, Kay & Beyond

  • @Celludriel
    I think you might have misread. Territory ownership will be much more valuable with the introduction of the invasion feature.

    "Raiding" refers to an additional feature that allows you to place racketeers on a territory that you do not control, to drain a certain percentage of the tokens/points that it generates. These raids are designed to be small open world skirmishes keeping people busy outside of the usual PvP content.
  • Korn wrote:

    @Celludriel
    I think you might have misread. Territory ownership will be much more valuable with the introduction of the invasion feature.

    "Raiding" refers to an additional feature that allows you to place racketeers on a territory that you do not control, to drain a certain percentage of the tokens/points that it generates. These raids are designed to be small open world skirmishes keeping people busy outside of the usual PvP content.
    Oh I understand that part, but if that drainage is barely noticeable and doesn't bring something real to the table, people might decide it's not worth doing. Maybe my reply was a bit to confusing, I was talking about the racketeers. I can believe it will be a hard thing to balance, between making it worthwhile or making it overpowered that guilds will need to do it 24/7 to stay on top.

    My concerns are still there though, for raiding to be successful it has to be worth doing it
  • Korn wrote:

    Some short comments on the invasion feature.
    • on invasion day, roughly half the watchtower territories (home plots excluded, farms likely excluded) will get invaded at exactly the same time in the EU timezone, and the other half at exactly the same time in the US timezone.
    • That's close to 100 territories becoming available for re-capture at the same time, meaning that all players taking part in this will have to spread out, as there is no point doing one after the other.
    • So what counts is not really how many active PvPers you have in your guild, but rather, how many active PvPers you have per territory that you could.
    • If you are overextended, i.e. control far more watchtower territories due to having 1 or 2 strong GvG teams, but don't really have enough members to actively use these territories, it will be hard to hold them all. This type of "soft reset" is intended, and it prevents the game from getting stale.
    Now, as we do have this soft-reset mechanism in place, we now can give much more rewards for holding territories in the first place.

    Here is how it will possibly work:
    • For each day, after the first, that you hold a territory, your guild will get reward points / tokens that can be exchanged for great rewards (special mounts, high end artifacts, etc, details tbd). These points/tokens will also be used for guild rankings.
    • You will get a large amount of bonus points for holding a territory on invasion day, before it gets invaded
    In short, the game design goals of this feature are as follows
    • Make capturing and holding watchtower territories much more rewarding
    • Create an epic world-wide PvP event once per month, allowing everyone to take part
    • Allow guilds to capture lots of territories with just 5 or 10 skilled GvG players, but make it a challenge for them to hold them on invasion day if they over-extended themselves too much. Don't worry though: these guilds will still end up on top the leaderboards. If you are winning most of your GvGs, you'll be able to reclaim territories lost on invasion day.
    As an additional feature, now that we passively award guild points / tokens for holding territories, we are introducing the open world raiding option, allowing guilds to use some guerrilla tactics against each other. These won't be game deciding, but they will provide constant targets in guild warfare, and making guild vs guild wars about much more than just 5v5s and the occasional open world fight.
    But do you play the game Korn?

    It will be a tier 4/5 nightmare off unskilled players lagfest.

    The GVG territorie system is one off the only Risk vs Reward features left in the game, and terrotoires are what all guilds want, becuse they are already wery rewarding.

    You should make more deferent maps of territories, like in Beta1 with the essences and mine, so deferent team comb´s would have advantage.

    atm guilds are doing Raids against territories to loot the enemy guilds t8 resourses, i think that it is how it should be, please dont make more low tier zvz. Also you can let the resourses spawn faster to set up the openworld pvp/fight for resouerses.

    The resourses boss´s are also a great feature. Make a t7 and maybe a t8 boss, that respon randomly ad random places to counter the low tier zergfest. Keep the castles to low tier zergfest, by making the reward worth it again.
  • Raithe wrote:

    @Korn
    After seeing the roadmap i am hoping for a simple answer in relation to the map. Are there any plans to eventually expand the overworld map and add more dungeons as well as more variety to dungeons?
    Yes, absolutely.

    Our level design team is separate from the game designers and coders, and their only job is to build new levels/maps or improve existing ones. The team is continuing to work in full force post-release.
  • While the Guild QoL improvements are my only priority, I can't stand idly by.

    Korn wrote:

    Some short comments on the invasion feature.
    • on invasion day, roughly half the watchtower territories (home plots excluded, farms likely excluded) will get invaded at exactly the same time in the EU timezone, and the other half at exactly the same time in the US timezone.
    • That around 80 territories becoming available for re-capture at the same time, meaning that all players taking part in this will have to spread out, as there is no point doing one after the other.
    • So what counts is not really how many active PvPers you have in your guild, but rather, how many active PvPers you have per territory that you could.
    • If you are overextended, i.e. control far more watchtower territories due to having 1 or 2 strong GvG teams, but don't really have enough members to actively use these territories, it will be hard to hold them all. This type of "soft reset" is intended, and it prevents the game from getting stale.
    Now, as we do have this soft-reset mechanism in place, we now can give much more rewards for holding territories in the first place.

    Here is how it will possibly work:
    • For each day, after the first, that you hold a territory, your guild will get reward points / tokens that can be exchanged for great rewards (special mounts, high end artifacts, etc, details tbd). These points/tokens will also be used for guild rankings.
    • You will get a large amount of bonus points for holding a territory on invasion day, before it gets invaded
    In short, the game design goals of this feature are as follows
    • Make capturing and holding watchtower territories much more rewarding
    • Create an epic world-wide PvP event once per month, allowing everyone to take part
    • Allow guilds to capture lots of territories with just 5 or 10 skilled GvG players, but make it a challenge for them to hold them on invasion day if they over-extended themselves too much. Don't worry though: these guilds will still end up on top the leaderboards. If you are winning most of your GvGs, you'll be able to reclaim territories lost on invasion day.
    As an additional feature, now that we passively award guild points / tokens for holding territories, we are introducing the open world raiding option, allowing guilds to use some guerrilla tactics against each other. These won't be game deciding, but they will provide constant targets in guild warfare, and making guild vs guild wars about much more than just 5v5s and the occasional open world fight.

    So why is it we want a soft-reset mechanism? What purpose is it serving? Are we trying to bring balance to guilds with what you perceive as too many territories? Are we trying to allow smaller guilds to in to the mix on a monthly cycle by holding a single or few watchtower territories? Are we trying to introduce some Guild wide PvE content that effects territory control? Tell us your motivation and reasoning behind designing the feature and maybe we can come up with an alternative rather then pick your solution apart.

    So lets address the elephant in the room.. Zergs. Lets take the current state of the game for example and look at the three largest alliances:

    [ARCH] 8184 Members / [HATE] 2544 Members / [OOPS] 1308 Members

    Sure these numbers include alts and inactive, lets say agree on 25%. Which makes things [ARCH] 6547, [HATE] 1908, and [OOPS] with 981. For arguments sake, take your total number of territories at 80 per timezone and that means each alliance could potentially assign ARCH 81x, HATE 31x, OOPS 16x bodies to each. This could be either to conquer, hold, or harass others while other forces concentrate. Obviously no guild would want to control all these territories with their various attack times, but I hope you get the idea.

    @Korn can you comment on how YOU think zergs will take advantage of the new system? Can you @Korn tell us how you feel smaller organizations will be impacted by the system you've outlined?

    As for how guild benefit.. why not look to titles like ArcheAge, WoW, and Guild Wars 2?


    ArcheAge has Guild Levels with perks, Guild Shop (items determined by level) with custom currency, Guild Missions, Dominion (Global GvG anywhere anytime), and a territory siege system.

    Trion wrote:

    Guild Level 1: Tahyang’s Energy – Increases Dash speed +15%.
    Guild Level 2: Aranzeb’s Energy – Includes Tahyang’s Energy bonus and increases XP earned +7%.
    Guild Level 3: Ollo’s Energy – Includes Aranzeb’s Energy bonuses and increases loot drop rate +7%.
    Guild Level 4: Naima’s Energy – Includes Ollo’s Energy bonuses and decreases cooldown for Recall -15%, decreases Recall cast time -7%.
    Guild Level 5: Inoch’s Energy – Includes Naima’s Energy bonuses and Increases Honor Points +250 on jury’s verdict.
    Guild Level 6: Lucius’s Energy – Includes Inoch’s Energy bonuses and temporarily increases Glider speed when using skills like Glider Nitro and Somersault.
    Guild Level 7: Kyprosa’s Energy – Includes Lucius’s Energy bonuses and decreases ships/vehicle summoning cast time -20%.
    Guild Level 8: Eanna’s Energy – Includes Kyprosa’s Energy bonuses and decreases Rebirth Trauma -1min.


    WoW has Guild Levels with perks, Guild-bound items, custom Guild Titles, and Guild Achievements

    GW2 has Guild Missions, Guild Enhancements, Guild Currency "Commendations" which is a currency awarded for participation and usable at Guild Vendors for vanity and other types of items.. etc etc..


    These are a few examples of system that you should consider when going down this path IMO. I'm not a game designer, but you guys sure do make me want to be one.. I'd flesh things out further if there was a point. In the end, there's so much potential in Albion, there always has been.. Please try to tap in to it better, the systems you guys have described here seem flawed and under developed IMO.

    Also, Guild QoL before any of this.. No point in guild content if there are no guilds to participate.
  • Vortech wrote:

    So lets address the elephant in the room.. Zergs. Lets take the current state of the game for example and look at the three largest alliances:

    [ARCH] 8184 Members / [HATE] 2544 Members / [OOPS] 1308 Members

    Sure these numbers include alts and inactive, lets say agree on 25%. Which makes things [ARCH] 6547, [HATE] 1908, and [OOPS] with 981. For arguments sake, take your total number of territories at 80 per timezone and that means each alliance could potentially assign ARCH 81x, HATE 31x, OOPS 16x bodies to each. This could be either to conquer, hold, or harass others while other forces concentrate. Obviously no guild would want to control all these territories with their various attack times, but I hope you get the idea.
    Im pretty sure he doesnt get it... people tried to explain this, that this is the biggest snowball mechanic ever towards numbers instead of actual gameplay,


    Also, did i mention, that this event is ONCE A MONTH FOR 15 MINUTES! Can i get a time schedule for invasions 2018 so i can hand in holidays, make sure i can play at exactly those 15 minutes each month to make sure i can actually defend a territory?



    Also, in which world is this a soft reset?

    Yes, it resets the first time it will be introduced, but after that point, the 81 - 31- 16 ratio will stay and we have a stale environment where it is not worth contesting watchtowers via long lasting gvgs/warcamps because after 30 days the WHOLE world will go back to the 81-31-16 split

    (sidenote, there might be smaller guilds that can snatch a single plot with all their force, but a single watchtower has pretty low value for a small guild anyways)



    Also, the alternative option was a 2-3 day cycle smaller event that gives you effects that make the gvg win easier if you win the event in a zone, and downsides for the defender if they lose it, but no control change.

    This would actually justify investing time into it, instead of

    15 minutes a month, or
    3h a year of actual event time
    Preparing for an important single GvG takes nearly longer than the whole INVASION CONCEPTS ACTUAL GAMEPLAY
    Proud owner of the T8 Offhand book Rosalia's Diary. Feel free to pm me once you have your own item named in Albion.

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

  • One can only wish they'd also add some sort of neutral, unconquerable, BZ zones that would mimic the NPC nullsec of EvE. It could be the stepping stone the game would need to cater to smaller guilds because let's face it, not everyone wants to be a faceless cog in a zerg.
  • @Korn

    Hi there, can you please share your insight on how you plan to make lesser used Healing items, like Divine Staff, more useful?

    It's almost imperative to have a one handed staff (Holy or Druidic) coupled with an EoS. So, I'm wondering if you plan on giving some love to two-handed staff users also.

    Thanks!
  • This new reset territory button every 30 day sounds amazing!
    We will again see the biggest alliances grabbing the majority of territories by sheer numbers. It will be like launch day 1 but every 30 day instead.

    Adding to this mess will be that city plots won't reset and since they are more or less impossible to invade despite the lowered 30% defender buff. If a smaller alliance against all odds manage to snipe a watchtower it will be gone within a few days when their GvG team run out of resources or are asleep.

    As it is now territories gets raided to steal all t7 and t8 shiney resources. SBI stop wasting resources on shitty features and focus on what you promised over and over GUILD MANAGEMENT TOOLS!

    And while you are at it mop up your cherry picked round table if that is the place you get your crazy ideas from.

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

  • Why SBI thinks the reset is needed is actually a good question. I have a feeling that it is related to the fact that the map and transportation are so bad that anyone can be anywhere in the world starting from any random position in under 10 minutes but instead of fixing this and make logistics meaningful (and therefore over extension a problem) in any way to this game someone thought a reset would do the trick.

    Maybe I am wrong but would love to know why devs wants a reset and why anyone keeps fighting over something they are bound to lose on the next dev reset?

    And why can't we have a sandbox instead of the devs keep interfering in the game instead of just giving us sand?

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

  • changes like this and more instanced content make the game stray away from sandbox indeed. Somewhere along the development of Albion the lead designer took another direction to please the new playermass and decided to cater to playground if it is due to more profit of a bigger playerbase or what it is we can hope @Eltharyon can answer.
  • Rosalia wrote:

    Vortech wrote:

    So lets address the elephant in the room.. Zergs. Lets take the current state of the game for example and look at the three largest alliances:

    [ARCH] 8184 Members / [HATE] 2544 Members / [OOPS] 1308 Members

    Sure these numbers include alts and inactive, lets say agree on 25%. Which makes things [ARCH] 6547, [HATE] 1908, and [OOPS] with 981. For arguments sake, take your total number of territories at 80 per timezone and that means each alliance could potentially assign ARCH 81x, HATE 31x, OOPS 16x bodies to each. This could be either to conquer, hold, or harass others while other forces concentrate. Obviously no guild would want to control all these territories with their various attack times, but I hope you get the idea.
    Im pretty sure he doesnt get it... people tried to explain this, that this is the biggest snowball mechanic ever towards numbers instead of actual gameplay,

    Also, did i mention, that this event is ONCE A MONTH FOR 15 MINUTES! Can i get a time schedule for invasions 2018 so i can hand in holidays, make sure i can play at exactly those 15 minutes each month to make sure i can actually defend a territory?



    Also, in which world is this a soft reset?

    Yes, it resets the first time it will be introduced, but after that point, the 81 - 31- 16 ratio will stay and we have a stale environment where it is not worth contesting watchtowers via long lasting gvgs/warcamps because after 30 days the WHOLE world will go back to the 81-31-16 split

    (sidenote, there might be smaller guilds that can snatch a single plot with all their force, but a single watchtower has pretty low value for a small guild anyways)



    Also, the alternative option was a 2-3 day cycle smaller event that gives you effects that make the gvg win easier if you win the event in a zone, and downsides for the defender if they lose it, but no control change.

    This would actually justify investing time into it, instead of

    15 minutes a month, or
    3h a year of actual event time
    Preparing for an important single GvG takes nearly longer than the whole INVASION CONCEPTS ACTUAL GAMEPLAY


    Again, I just hope he puts this to discussion before going forward with it. Feels like such a rushed concept without any deep thought given. It'll favor even more zerg alliances. In the end they'll be excluding other guilds and making the game even more stale than before.

    Such an artificial/forced mechanism to try to create activity at the expense of the whole GvG system and the guilds/alliances effort.
  • Taking the fact that I feel lack creativity to these features that are coming. I read a lot of people complaining about the "Arena" without even having read that the reward is only VANITIY. Many wrote that the fact that there are instances/arenas in cities would ruin the open world. How would ruin it if what they give of reward will be worth little and nothing? PvE in the open world gives more fame and better reward than any instance of city. Do not be so closed, before criticizing know how to read at least. Anyway I think that the content that is going to add in the rest of the year is quite poor of creativity. I expected much more, but what to say ... Albion is a great game, I support the project and I just hope for the best. Let's do the same, be positive and try to support them, obviously it would be good to add essential things, but I want to believe that they will be working for next year (I hope from the heart)
  • @Vortech First you complain about zerg guilds (and i second your complains here, cause its messed up), and then you suggest unlockable guild levels with rewards? Take a guess what type of guilds will benefit from those the most...

    I have played a lot of mmorpg titles and each of them that had grindable guild levels had lot of zerg guilds that offered nothing to its recruits but juicy guild perks. And that boosted their popularity even more.

    Guild perks if they are to be implemented they would have to be unlockable with possibility of losing them, so the numbers in the guild wouldnt play any role in their unlocking/losing. Somethinig along the lines of kill fame moving you closer to next level and perk, while death of guild member drops you down by the amount of fame lost - that would separate big but organised guilds, from unorganised zerg.
  • Gwandir wrote:

    @Norgannon because no itemloss in arenas. Ppl will buy best gear then just sit in city doing arenas 24/7.

    How does that help a playerdriven economy?
    And what do you think they will do after they get bored of pvp with no rewards?

    How does people leaving the game help the economy? When PvP is saturated with beta-veterans and rich folks, many people dont feel like practising PvP by going yolo and hoping to find fair 1v1 so they can test how particular builds work against other particular builds. I havent found a single encounter where i would face 1 enemy (ok maybe like 2%). People either jump you with adventage of numbers, adventage of gear and experience, or run away. There is absolutely no way to practise things other than begging for duels around towns, with people in higher gear. When you take all of this into account, and think about practising variety of possible builds, you first need to earn a lot. That means either heavy grind, fat wallet or some chesse money making attempts - and those take time. Why would you go into open world pvp not knowing how to fight particular builds, not knowing what to expect from them and how to counter their potential and not having enough funds to just ignore the cost of respawning? This may sound fun only for crazy people who attach some ideaology on top of it. But i bet those are in minority and vast majority are beta-experienced players who now are so eager to say "grow a pair and learn the hard way". No thanks. Knowing the battle first, before going to fight it is my sort of thing, as opposite to going to fight blindly and seek to win it. But thats ok. Everyone have their own preferences.

    With arenas i will finally have a trainig ground, and once i feel competent i will do PvP in the open world - so will many others. Only thing current PvPers (who complain about this arena) might be affraid of would be losing their adventage and free kills. And that says a lot about how "good" they are. ;)

    The post was edited 5 times, last by Falrinth ().