This is some AC / DC shit.
Emdash is the Tesla of MoFo! Please consider my words because I believe they will illuminate something.
____
We were wrong all along (to recap.) The initial theory was that the world was a sandbox and that free placement, points of interest, and rare resources would create enduring content. This was seen as the end game. However, there were issues that came up, like new player experience / early progress. People gave up on protecting and developing towns because it was not 'worth it.'
The flaw has become apparent. In Mortal Online, you have to join a guild to optimally progress. The more people that join a guild, the more optimally you progress. Thus, people all join big guilds. This creates a really shit and 'gated' game haha.
However, if you imagine what a guild is and instead put towns in that first level role, the whole game shifts. If you are contributing to a TOWN, people are all centered around a core area. If people are contesting a town, it can be more easily made to where it isn't hide in seek in strongholds. If you log into Mortal Online 2 and you see 15 Odinseed parked at the bank, getting ready to run whatever dungeon, you will think "I should join Odinseed!" or you will be like "Odinseed sux," and try in vain to contest them.
If you log in to Mortal and the town is poppin', people are doing work, people are fighting people who are raiding the town or griefing the area, everyone in said town is working, whether they want to, either for or against the goal that is centered in that town. And their success / failure can shape the area around the town. Then, your choice is for or against said town. You instantly have a role even if you are a nub.
___
Guilds can still exist because people want to do things that are not exactly be a townie, but the core should be based in town. The idea that you should go as far away from town as you can to get end game content is flawed, and it creates exclusive zergy game play. If a town becomes 'a zerg' incentives can be given to people to oppose the town or to stop supporting it.
If a town gets pushed to the brink, incentives can be given to people who wanna play vs the world in the town. Big bonuses. Give like hero of Nave bonuses to make people stronger around that area, get more gains from resources around that area, etc. Set it at a point where it is generally pushing toward equality and then you have so much content.
You have town vs anti-town. You have town vs other town. You have guild vs guild. Mix and match.
People who wanna log in and grief town should be able to. They should be able to build camps n shit and troll out. That is content, a large portion of the player base wants to play like that, and the key is to make it so that there is a benefit for contesting them. That is why we don't need outlaws and bug invasions really. That is superficial meme content that is hiding the lack of endgame.
Let people grief the shit out of the town, and the more grief they inflict, the more the bonus that is given for defeating them. YES it is true that THE SAME PEOPLE could be griefing the town then 'defeat themselves.' But that's still content. In a small game, it still gives a lot of content for the adjacent new player who is trying to get involved. I ain't mad at that considering what is happening atm.
There are outposts, make the outposts that are based on a town be the town and give the outposts that are not associated with a town a camp. Let each region start out as its own entity and let things develop from there. Let the bonuses be for all people associated with the area based on how well the area is doing.
And say you are getting 15% mining bonus for being a citizen, you should get at least 15% mining bonus for being directly opposed to the area as well. We want content. We want people to fight in a more organic way.
Tell me where I am wrong here??
Emdash is the Tesla of MoFo! Please consider my words because I believe they will illuminate something.
____
We were wrong all along (to recap.) The initial theory was that the world was a sandbox and that free placement, points of interest, and rare resources would create enduring content. This was seen as the end game. However, there were issues that came up, like new player experience / early progress. People gave up on protecting and developing towns because it was not 'worth it.'
The flaw has become apparent. In Mortal Online, you have to join a guild to optimally progress. The more people that join a guild, the more optimally you progress. Thus, people all join big guilds. This creates a really shit and 'gated' game haha.
However, if you imagine what a guild is and instead put towns in that first level role, the whole game shifts. If you are contributing to a TOWN, people are all centered around a core area. If people are contesting a town, it can be more easily made to where it isn't hide in seek in strongholds. If you log into Mortal Online 2 and you see 15 Odinseed parked at the bank, getting ready to run whatever dungeon, you will think "I should join Odinseed!" or you will be like "Odinseed sux," and try in vain to contest them.
If you log in to Mortal and the town is poppin', people are doing work, people are fighting people who are raiding the town or griefing the area, everyone in said town is working, whether they want to, either for or against the goal that is centered in that town. And their success / failure can shape the area around the town. Then, your choice is for or against said town. You instantly have a role even if you are a nub.
___
Guilds can still exist because people want to do things that are not exactly be a townie, but the core should be based in town. The idea that you should go as far away from town as you can to get end game content is flawed, and it creates exclusive zergy game play. If a town becomes 'a zerg' incentives can be given to people to oppose the town or to stop supporting it.
If a town gets pushed to the brink, incentives can be given to people who wanna play vs the world in the town. Big bonuses. Give like hero of Nave bonuses to make people stronger around that area, get more gains from resources around that area, etc. Set it at a point where it is generally pushing toward equality and then you have so much content.
You have town vs anti-town. You have town vs other town. You have guild vs guild. Mix and match.
People who wanna log in and grief town should be able to. They should be able to build camps n shit and troll out. That is content, a large portion of the player base wants to play like that, and the key is to make it so that there is a benefit for contesting them. That is why we don't need outlaws and bug invasions really. That is superficial meme content that is hiding the lack of endgame.
Let people grief the shit out of the town, and the more grief they inflict, the more the bonus that is given for defeating them. YES it is true that THE SAME PEOPLE could be griefing the town then 'defeat themselves.' But that's still content. In a small game, it still gives a lot of content for the adjacent new player who is trying to get involved. I ain't mad at that considering what is happening atm.
There are outposts, make the outposts that are based on a town be the town and give the outposts that are not associated with a town a camp. Let each region start out as its own entity and let things develop from there. Let the bonuses be for all people associated with the area based on how well the area is doing.
And say you are getting 15% mining bonus for being a citizen, you should get at least 15% mining bonus for being directly opposed to the area as well. We want content. We want people to fight in a more organic way.
Tell me where I am wrong here??
