Forcing players to interact with others for crafting purposes is great, but one character per account locks us to one combat playstyle.

[Kaemik]

One thing I'm entirely against is this idea that that more accounts as a means to move around the map is a good thing. If we want unmounted builds to get around quicker there are three ways I'd like to see that happen:

1. Passenger seats on certain mounts.
2. Carts and wagons.
3. Ships.

Especially if it does not take skills to drive carts/wagons/ships and if they have high passenger capacity these would allow people to move infantry around the map at a similar speed to cavalry hopefully.

We don't want people using multiple accounts as a meta teleportation system though. For the exact same reasons we don't want teleportation in the first place. It destroys the idea of local economy and local politics. Thankfully, very few people will choose to do that if we destroy the pay-to-win multi account crafting system. The less win we give the pay-to-win, the less people who will choose to do it.

 

[Kebek]

Horses should have the option of a passenger tbh, at the cost of not being able to slap on saddle bags.

 

[Strilan]

What I would really love to see is the profession skill-cap fully lifted and then the time to max a profession skill increased to like 1-2 years of active play. In doing so it makes it impossible to fully max everything and that's your limit that promotes interdependency.

Siri, play "Hell Nah - To The Nah Nah Nah" on Spotify.

DF?!

 

[Kaemik]

Siri, play "Hell Nah - To The Nah Nah Nah" on Spotify.

DF?!

It's not really a system intended to appeal to anyone but crafters. Real crafters will appreciate it takes work to master their craft. Crafting is still an entirely optional playstyle though, and a lot of people will opt-out if it requires that much commitment. That's fine.

That's part of the reason it SHOULDN'T be done on the combat side. The best way to progress as a PvPer should be PvPing. That's currently the case as PvP progression is all about growing into a more skilled player. Only actually participating in PvP gives you the experiences necessary to become better at it as opposed to games like ArcheAge where PvE grind can lead to the ability to one-shot people.

But that's also why it's completely appropriate to make crafting take time to progress. Because crafting takes no real skill and there is no progression beyond max character skill. Game isn't even released yet and already I have some professions with nearly complete spreadsheets of the recipes that matter, so the material complexity isn't going to hold people back forever either.

Crafting should take time to fully master. Currently, the best way to progress as a crafter is... buy more accounts once you max the ones you have. Let's leave crafting to the real crafters who want to invest some time into it, not the whales.

 

[Mortalitas Immortalis]

We don't want people using multiple accounts as a meta teleportation system though. For the exact same reasons we don't want teleportation in the first place. It destroys the idea of local economy and local politics. Thankfully, very few people will choose to do that if we destroy the pay-to-win multi account crafting system. The less win we give the pay-to-win, the less people who will choose to do it.

You cannot destroy that system. As demonstrated even in the original Mortal Online with regard to free to play accounts, workarounds will be found to any limits placed when it comes to multiple accounts. In a single-character-per account scenario the choices are pay for convenience (multiple accounts) or don't.

You're interacting with a very prominent person who has already embraced this idea before the game is even live immediately above this post, and he will not be/is not the only one.

 

[Kaemik]

You cannot destroy that system. As demonstrated even in the original Mortal Online with regard to free to play accounts, workarounds will be found to any limits placed when it comes to multiple accounts.

Then describe to me how you game a system where the limiting factor to crafting skills is time invested doing them (what I am suggesting) vs. easy skilling up to a skillcap per account (how it is now).

It can't be done. Please read my actual suggestion.

 

[Floky]

SV has a system in mind I would like to have more than one char per account but if it stays at one it just means I have to have more than one account subbed. I am fine with this hsveing myore skill points per char does a little because different build have different race and stat points so I feel like adding more skill points just makes chars more wide and less specialized for a playstyle. In mo1 i had 3 subed accounts so I don't really see the issue in haveing more than one account subbed, even if sv added more chars per account I would probably still have more than one account subbed

 

[Strilan]

You're interacting with a very prominent person.....

I can't begin to tell you how much that means to see *you* write that.

<3 :-*

 

[LivingshadeNL]

Just be realistic here. People gonna want more chars, so they buy second or more account. Even if sv ip blocks people gonna use proxys. Be realistic. Add more chars.

 

[Dominatrixx]

One char per account with skill-cap, that's what MMORPGs should be.

 

[Speznat]

I like the one char politic. That is how mortal always should have been.
I really hope they never add a second char to the accounts.
The multi account system of MO1 was one of the reaosns why so many shit and greefing was happening.

 

[techActual]

A term surprisingly absent from this threads' vocabulary is meta.

Looking back, do you believe MO1 had a combat meta? How does a combat meta effect a game like this? How does a combat meta effect balancing? How does balancing effect combat characters in PvP a hardcore environment such as MO? How do all these effects.. effect the potential success and long term viability of a niche game like MO?

While some replies are predictably valuing old school "difficultly" for the sake of "difficulty", in an age of dynamic game design.. I just can't help but feel more could be done about this critical core element of MO2. While personally refreshing to return to an age of choices that matter, IMO the novelty will wear off only slightly slower than the monthly active user count. Gaming is just different now, even limited success comes at a much different cost than years ago like our benchmarks: Darkfall, Ultima, SWG, and MO1.

By indirectly encouraging multiple accounts, is SV increasing the power gap from the average player to the hardcore? Are they increasing the gap from the average player to the whale? In a game like this, if encouraged.. if allowed.. many will seek the advantage.. some will seek the convenience.

Some days I want my quick DEX focused Archer, others I may want to try magic... and then perhaps a STRENGTH based melee fighter. There are so many options in this game, and all I ask is for the ability to explore them all (Or at least several of them) on a single account.

Above is the likely sentiment of what I believe to be the vocal majority of potential/new players to MO2. The OP is coming at this in a self-serving POV, but no less relevant. My thing here is, if limited to one build and one character.. Is the scope so narrow that it negatively impacts the potential success of the game? Will battles be comprised of mainly meta builds.. completely devoid of some archetypes altogether? Will battles be limited in tactics due to narrow scope of builds utilized by the playerbase over time?

Would it be wrong to compromise here as the player is limited to a single character? Allowing players and tactics some flexibility in regards to equipment while sacrificing something?

No, keep one character per account. It seems everyone has become so comfortable in other mmo's/games where you can decide, on a whim, to completely change your character, make a new one, reroll, whatever it may be without consequence. Why should you be able to in MO2? Why should you have the ability to be a badass mage one minute and a beefy great sword wielding bastard the next? And on top of that, you want to have additional characters strictly to craft everything you need? Did you forget this is a HARDCORE MMO? It's not supposed to be easy, you shouldn't have the ability to do everything by yourself and you shouldn't be able to play switch playstyles without any consequence or set backs.

Maybe it's just me but I like playing difficult games and this game is meant to be difficult. If you wanna completely change your character, start over.

Is difficult the right word here? What your describing, while exaggerated.. just sounds limited to me. I'm all for compromise, maybe even some sacrifice.. But if a person kept at something long enough, is it unbelievable they would seek to expand their knowledge? Possibly, learn something new? In such a niche category of a game, should we really be seeking to narrow the choices when arguably unnecessary?

 

[Kaemik]

Meta is my issue. Here's the advantage having more than one account brings:

1. Easy access to additional professions.
2. Additional combat builds that can be played.
3. The ability to be several places on the map at once.
4. The ability to do semi-afk tasks like mining/woodcutting while actively playing your main using multiple computers.
5. The ability to take taming and thieving as professions without gimping your mains combat abilities.

As is. Hell yeah, I'm getting a third account (The 2nd one is my fiances main). 4th or 5th even potentially. But...

1. Easy access to additional professions.
2. Additional combat builds that can be played.
3. The ability to be several places on the map at once.
4. The ability to do semi-afk tasks like mining/woodcutting while actively playing your main using multiple computers.
5. The ability to take taming and thieving as professions without gimping your mains combat abilities.

Both those advantages are eliminated by proposals I have put forward. Now I'm reconsidering the third account quite a bit. And the 4th and 5th are straight off the table.

People say they don't want pay-to-win. But combating pay-to-win is about giving people less win for more pay. And some people who pay lip service to the idea the game shouldn't be pay-to-win have put forward NOTHING in the way of proposals as how to combat it. Other than we shouldn't do it because it's not "honorable". Reality check, that's not stopping any of us.

You need to do one of two things in discussions like this.

1. Admit you a pro pay-to-win.
2. Put forth or support ideas to actually control it.

As is, those list of advantages make this game VERY pay-to-win if you're paying any attention whatsoever.

 

[ShadowPete]

All this talk is kind of moot folks. Think about it. What's stopping anyone from just buying multiple accounts? Will they police ISP or something? No way SV wants to sell as much as it can of course. So multiple accounts are going to happen whether or not you try to limit each individual account.

You are 100% right. Multiple accounts will happen. However that will be on the minority.

Having to pay 15$ monthly for each additional account is a deterrent for most players.

Also, they can make multi accounting bannable. It's not that hard to find out if a player has multiple accounts.

 

[Speznat]

You are 100% right. Multiple accounts will happen. However that will be on the minority.

Having to pay 15$ monthly for each additional account is a deterrent for most players.

Also, they can make multi accounting bannable. It's not that hard to find out if a player has multiple accounts.

So if i play with my brother or a friend mortal as lan party and make dungeon as lan party and we all would be banned for this. Than this would be a very shitty idea.

 

[IrishQueen]

Multiple accounts are allowed stated by Henrik in his live stream when asked the question.

The question was asked multiple times on discord as well and many of the devs stated that it is allowed.

Henrik also said there won't be any bans for having multiple accounts either unless you are trying to ban evade.

 

[Kaemik]

You are 100% right. Multiple accounts will happen. However that will be on the minority.

Having to pay 15$ monthly for each additional account is a deterrent for most players.

Also, they can make multi accounting bannable. It's not that hard to find out if a player has multiple accounts.

1. It doesn't matter if it's the minority. The people who do it will be the people who take the game most seriously, giving those few players a power edge significant enough to have a severe detrimental effect on the rest of the game.

2. Good luck enforcing it. Other games have tried and failed.

This is precisely what we saw with ArcheAge Unchained. "We won't allow more than 3 accounts per player. We're going to be aggressively banning gold buyers and sellers."

Most of the players on the top 100 list and all the players in the top 10 were running more than 3 accounts and/or buying gold on every server. The efforts they made to combat this did little. The players who got the most harmed were those trying to be legit and playing by the rules watching everyone else pass them by because they were breaking all the rules and not getting punished for it.

I have no trust left game companies trying enforce rules when it comes to behaviors that give a competitive edge. Build the mechanics of the game to encourage or discourage the behavior you want, or don't try to control it at all.

 

[Thorrior_DE]

This may be a stupid question, but can you even run 2 instances of MO2 on the same computer? The game uses Steam and AFAIK you can't have multiple instances of steam running at the same time.

 

[Azzerhoden Razeri]

1. It doesn't matter if it's the minority. The people who do it will be the people who take the game most seriously, giving those few players a power edge significant enough to have a severe detrimental effect on the rest of the game.

That's how life works. 'Fairness' and a 'level playing field' is a fantasy. Someone is always going to have an edge in a game over someone else, whether its being closer to the server, having faster reaction skills, or more loyal, dedicated guild mates.

The purpose for having one character slot, in addition to reducing the level of easy griefing other players, is to build relationships across the player base. I fully understand that this can be frustrating for players who need something and have to rely on someone else - it impacts what you want to do at that particular moment, and you should be able to do what you want, when you want because you are paying money to play this game. I'd have multiple characters if it was allowed.

However, because we cannot, everyone will be reliant on intra and inter dependent relationships with those around them which, like the real world, is how communities are built.

 

[KevinDL]

That's how life works. 'Fairness' and a 'level playing field' is a fantasy. Someone is always going to have an edge in a game over someone else, whether its being closer to the server, having faster reaction skills, or more loyal, dedicated guild mates.

The purpose for having one character slot, in addition to reducing the level of easy griefing other players, is to build relationships across the player base. I fully understand that this can be frustrating for players who need something and have to rely on someone else - it impacts what you want to do at that particular moment, and you should be able to do what you want, when you want because you are paying money to play this game. I'd have multiple characters if it was allowed.

However, because we cannot, everyone will be reliant on intra and inter dependent relationships with those around them which, like the real world, is how communities are built.

You're writing as if family names were / have never been a thing. Characters across an account can be forced to share the same last name, and all reps can be applied account-wide so that people can't just have one character that remains friendly to all factions. There are methods being used in other games to allow multiple characters while maintaining the community interaction you profess to be protecting.